From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kelly v. Rose

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 18, 1943
265 App. Div. 1068 (N.Y. App. Div. 1943)

Opinion

February 18, 1943.


The motion will be considered as a motion for reargument. Motion granted. On reargument, the decision of this court handed down December 14, 1942 [ ante, p. 948], is amended to read as follows: Plaintiff-wife sued to recover damages for personal injuries sustained when she slipped on a patch of ice on the sidewalk in front of appellant's premises; while her husband sought to recover for medical expenses and loss of services. Judgment reversed on the law, with costs, and the complaint dismissed on the law, with costs, on the authority of Connolly v. Bursch ( 149 App. Div. 772). Fitzgerald v. City of New Rochelle ( 259 App. Div. 1015) is not applicable to the facts in this case. All findings of fact are affirmed. Close, P.J., Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Kelly v. Rose

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 18, 1943
265 App. Div. 1068 (N.Y. App. Div. 1943)
Case details for

Kelly v. Rose

Case Details

Full title:DELIA KELLY et al., Respondents, v. MAURICE H. ROSE, Appellant, et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 18, 1943

Citations

265 App. Div. 1068 (N.Y. App. Div. 1943)

Citing Cases

Mills v. Farwin Realty Corp.

The majority concludes that defendant, having undertaken to clear the sidewalk in front of its premises,…