From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

A.L. Russell, Inc. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 26, 1957
4 A.D.2d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)

Opinion

November 26, 1957


Judgment and order awarding interest on the verdict, in each action, unanimously reversed and complaint in each action dismissed, with costs to the appellants. We would not agree with defendants' argument that they might with legal impunity heedlessly drain water from the subsoil supporting an adjoining building knowing that as a likely consequence the building would settle. We do agree with their contention, however, that the evidence fails to disclose that they knew or should have known of a danger to be anticipated, or that they were negligent in the conduct of the operation claimed to be the cause of the settlement of the building. In view of this disposition there is no occasion to pass on the other questions raised on this appeal. Settle order.

Concur — Peck, P.J., Botein, Rabin, Valente and McNally, JJ.


Summaries of

A.L. Russell, Inc. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 26, 1957
4 A.D.2d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)
Case details for

A.L. Russell, Inc. v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:A.L. RUSSELL, INC., Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant and CAYUGA…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 26, 1957

Citations

4 A.D.2d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)

Citing Cases

Holdorf v. Oneonta Urban Renewal Agency

The foregoing was confirmed by the report of plaintiffs' expert, who gave a scientific explanation for the…