From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

HIRSCH v. HADE

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Jan 21, 1970
62 Misc. 2d 888 (N.Y. App. Term 1970)

Opinion

January 21, 1970

Appeal from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, LEONARD FINZ, J.

Louis J. Castellano, Jr., for appellant.

Murray Alber and Marilyn P. Hoppenfeld for respondent.


In this action by a guest who tripped over a rug and was injured while leaving defendant's residence, the trial court in effect held that plaintiff was a social guest as distinguished from a licensee, and that defendant had a duty to warn him of defects known to defendant and which were neither hidden nor traps. This was error. Plaintiff, as a social guest, was a licensee and defendant's duty must accord with the established rules governing such relationship ( Plotz v. Greene, 13 A.D.2d 807, affd. 10 N.Y.2d 991; Goldstein v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 23, Town of Hempstead, 24 A.D.2d 1015, affd. 18 N.Y.2d 991; Levine v. Barfus, 28 A.D.2d 896; Bua v. Fernandez, 21 A.D.2d 887, revd. 15 N.Y.2d 664). The rights and obligations of the respective parties should be adjudicated on the basis of plaintiff's status as a licensee ( Finkle v. Zimmerman, 26 A.D.2d 179).

The judgment should be unanimously reversed, without costs, and a new trial ordered.

Concur — GROAT, P.J., RINALDI and CONE, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.


Summaries of

HIRSCH v. HADE

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Jan 21, 1970
62 Misc. 2d 888 (N.Y. App. Term 1970)
Case details for

HIRSCH v. HADE

Case Details

Full title:LELAND HIRSCH, Respondent, v. HYMAN J. HADE, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Jan 21, 1970

Citations

62 Misc. 2d 888 (N.Y. App. Term 1970)
310 N.Y.S.2d 14