From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. Bahmmuller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 28, 1908
124 App. Div. 558 (N.Y. App. Div. 1908)

Opinion

February 28, 1908.

Walter H. Liebmann, for the appellants.

Robert Stewart [ Ralph G. Barclay with him on the brief], for the respondent.


The defendants are copartners, and the negligence charged was the maintenance by the defendants of an open unguarded cellarway on their premises near the sidewalk. The plaintiff, a little boy eight years of age, was sitting on the step by the side of the cellarway when one of the defendants kicked him and caused him to fall into the cellarway, sustaining injuries for which he has recovered. The plaintiff's theory is that the open cellarway was one of the proximate causes of the injuries; that that and the assault were concurrent causes. We do not think so. The plaintiff's cause of action, if any, is for assault against the person who committed the assault.

The judgment and order should be reversed and a new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.

JENKS, GAYNOR and RICH, JJ., concurred; HOOKER, J., dissented.

Judgment and order of the County Court of Kings county reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.


Summaries of

Miller v. Bahmmuller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 28, 1908
124 App. Div. 558 (N.Y. App. Div. 1908)
Case details for

Miller v. Bahmmuller

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM JOSEPH MILLER, an Infant, by WILLIAM H. MILLER, His Guardian ad…

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

Date published: Feb 28, 1908

Citations

124 App. Div. 558 (N.Y. App. Div. 1908)
108 N.Y.S. 924

Citing Cases

City of Hazlehurst v. Matthews

The assault by Strahan was proximate cause of injury. Alexander v. Town of New Castle, 17 N.E. 200; Milostan…

Ammirati v. Transit Auth

" In support of this argument, defendant cites Miller v Bahmmuller ( 124 App. Div. 558). In that case, the…