Case Name: Bermer v. Atlantic Dredging Co.
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1890-12-10
Citations: 12 N.Y.S. 181
Docket Number: 
Parties: Bermer v. Atlantic Dredging Co.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 12
Pages: 181–181

Head Matter:
Bermer v. Atlantic Dredging Co.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
December 10, 1890.)
Torts—Injuries by Blasting.
Plaintiff’s house was injured by being shaken by blasting of rock by defendant, done in pursuance of a contract with the United States government for work on a public improvement. Held, that plaintiff might recover damages from defendant therefor, without proof that the blasting was done in a negligent manner.
Appeal from circuit court, Queens county.
Action by Charles Bermer against the Atlantic Dredging Company for injuries to plaintiff’s house, caused by the blasting of rock under water by defendant, pursuant to a contract with the United States for the removal of rock at Hell Gate, in the East river, FT. Y. From a judgment for plaintiff entered ■on the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals.
Argued before Barnard, P. J., and Pratt, J.
A. W. Parker, (Benjamin W. Downing, of counsel,) for appellant. Jaimes & Willcox, (Henry C. Willcox, of counsel,) for respondent.

Opinion:
Pratt, J.
The, verdict established that the blasting done by defendant at Hell Gate shook the walls of plaintiff's house inflicting injury. The court •charged that for such injury defendant was responsible, and refused to charge that to make defendant liable it must appear that the work was done in a negligent manner. We think the instruction was correct. If a desirable work cannot be done without shaking down a neighbor's house, it would seem that the work should not be performed, unless the doer was prepared to make compensation for the injury inflicted. That rule seems best to promote ¡the general welfare. The public are not benefited by a change that inflicts an injury greater than the resulting benefit. Judgment affirmed, with costs.