Anderson v. Dickie
The Superior Court of New York City
Statement of facts, by the appellant: The plaintiff sues to recover damages sustained by her in consequence of injuries received by her on the 12th June, 1862, by stepping into a vault-hole in front of premises Nos. 68 and 70 Lispenard street, owned by defendant.
Read the full summary
Statement of facts, by the appellant: The plaintiff sues to recover damages sustained by her in consequence of injuries received by her on the 12th June, 1862, by stepping into a vault-hole in front of premises Nos. 68 and 70 Lispenard street, owned by defendant. The defendant admits ownership of premises, and of vault being in front of said premises, but denies all the other allegations of the plaintiff, and says said vault-hole was well built, in good condition, and covered by a strong, substantial cover, which was well secured in its place. That on the first May, 1862, he parted with the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court, Robertson, Justice.
The plaintiff was injured by falling through a circular aperture in the pavement of the street in front of Nos. 68 and 70 Lispenard street, in the city of New York, from which a passage descended into a vault adjoining such premises and used therewith. This opening passage and vault were there when the premises were let by the defendant to a tenant. Such aperture was covered usually by a loose, movable circular grating, sunk into a circular flange or socket cut into the flagging of the side-walk, on which it rested. It appeared in evidence that a chain,…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Babbage v. . PowersNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Marine Ins. v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Arkansas · 1890
- Kenyon v. City of IndianapolisIndiana Superior Court · 1872
- Joyce v. MartinSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1887
- Waterhouse v. Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.