Smyth v. . City of New York
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 20, 1908, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The city is bound to exercise due care to keep the streets in a safe condition and is liable for permitting dangerous nuisances therein.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 20, 1908, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The city is bound to exercise due care to keep the streets in a safe condition and is liable for permitting dangerous nuisances therein. (Landau v. City of New York, 180 N. Y. 48; Vogel v. Mayor, etc., 92 N. Y. 10; Storrs v. City of Utica, 17 N. Y. 104; Requa v.…
1Opinion of the Court
Cullen, Ch. J.
This action is brought by the owners of the Murray Hill Hotel, which abutted on Park avenue, borough of Manhattan, city of New York, to recover damages to such hotel caused by the explosion of a dynamite magazine located on said avenue during the construction of the rapid transit subway. The construction of the subway at this point was being carried on by one Shaler, a sub-contractor. The excavation was being made through rock which had to be removed by blasting. For this purpose dynamite was employed—■ the central part of the carriageway of the avenue being fenced against use…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Lawrence v. . FoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Maxmilian v. . MayorNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Burr v. . BeersNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Robinson v. . ChamberlainNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Little v. . BanksNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- H. R. Moch Co. v. Rensselaer Water Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Seaver v. . RansomNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Burns v. Washington Savings & Great Southern Savings & Loan Ass'nMississippi Supreme Court · 1965
- Yazoo M.V.R. Co. v. SideboardMississippi Supreme Court · 1931
- Rentschler v. Missouri Pacific RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1934
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.