History
  • No items yet
midpage
Marcus v. Manhattan Beach Parks Corp.
246 A.D. 331
| N.Y. App. Div. | 1936
|
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

From the plaintiff’s proof and the photographs in evidence, the jury could have found that the defect which caused the plaintiff’s fall was the result of gradual wear or deterioration and that consequently the defendant was chargeable with constructive notice of the condition.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Martin, P. J., and Dore, J., dissent and vote for affirmance.

Judgment dismissing the complaint at the close of plaintiff’s case reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Case Details

Case Name: Marcus v. Manhattan Beach Parks Corp.
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Jan 24, 1936
Citation: 246 A.D. 331
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.