Case Name: George Solomon, Plaintiff, v. Marseilles Hotel Corp., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. State Elevator Co. Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1956-01-24
Citations: 1 A.D.2d 766
Docket Number: 
Parties: George Solomon, Plaintiff, v. Marseilles Hotel Corp., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. State Elevator Co. Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 766–766

Head Matter:
(January 24, 1956)
George Solomon, Plaintiff, v. Marseilles Hotel Corp., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. State Elevator Co. Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

Opinion:
Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion denied. The third-party complaint is legally sufficient. Only a trial of the issues can determine whether plaintiff is relying upon defendant's actual or constructive notice that the equipment was in defective condition. In a proper case a jury may find that an act of omission was passive negligence entitling a third-party plaintiff to recover over against the defendant whose conduct caused the dangerous condition (McFall v. Compagnie Maritime Belge, 304 N. Y. 314). Concur — Peck, P. J., Breitel, Bastow and Cox, JJ.