Legal Opinion

Cornell v. Huber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 3, 1905Published

Appeal from Special Term, Queens County. Action by William Cornell against George H. Huber. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

1Opinion of the CourtWoodward, J.

The complaint clearly is an action to recover on the common-law liability of an innkeeper to one who has been refused the privileges of a guest. The learned Special Term evidently treated it as an action for a penalty under the civil rights act (chapter 1042, p. 974, Laws 1895), and disposed of it on the authority of Lewis v. Hitchcock (D. C.) 10 Fed. 4. The common-law liability of an innkeeper, under the circumstances disclosed by this complaint, is fully recognized in Grinnell v. Cook, 3 Hill, 485, 38 Am. Dec. 663, and the subject is treated at length in People v. King, 110 N. Y. 418 et…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. . KingNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
  2. Lewis v. HitchcockDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1882

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API