Troeger v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
1Per curiam
Violation of an ordinance requiring the cleaning of sidewalks by abutting owners does not create a liability on the owner from injuries to a wayfarer. They are construed as creating a duty enforcible only by the municipality. (Restatement of the Law of Torts, § 288; City of Rochester v. Campbell, 123 N. Y. 405.)
The abutting owner has been said not to be liable for an injury resulting from a banana peel thrown on the sidewalk by a tenant (Frank v. Muller, 200 App. Div. 639), whereas a storekeeper was held liable where he created a similar condition (Ellis v. Friedlander, 198 App. Div, 57),
*538Here…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- City of Rochester v. . CampbellNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Frank v. MullerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Ellis v. FriedlanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
3Cited by8 opinions
- Steitz v. City of BeaconNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
- Burns Jackson Miller Summit & Spitzer v. LindnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Nelson v. SchultzNew York Supreme Court · 1939
- McCloud v. Parish of JeffersonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1980
- Schuster v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1953
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.