Judges: Ingraham, McLaughlin
Filed Date: 3/6/1914
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/12/2024
Plaintiff had a verdict of $18,250 against the defendants Oregon Apartments Company and Koch for personal injuries caused by his being hit by a piece of board which fell from one of the upper stories of a building in the course of construction. The Charles B. McManus Building and Operating Company, the owner of the premises, for the purpose of erecting a twelve-story building thereon, entered into separate agreements with different contractors to do certain parts of the work. Before the building was completed the McManus Company conveyed the property to the Oregon Apartments Company, and it thereafter continued the construction. Prior to this conveyance the Oregon Apartments Company made a contract with the defendant Koch to do the carpenter work, and plaintiff
The only witness who saw the board fall was the laborer on the roof. He testified that he first saw it when it was near the sixth story; that he was unable to say where it came from, or what caused it to fall, except it did not come from the load of lumber which was being hoisted.
The action was brought against the McManus Company and the Oregon Apartments Company on the ground that it was one of their employees who caused the board to fall, and against Koch on the ground that he failed to supply plaintiff with a safe place in which to work. The court asked the jury i to make a specific finding as to whether the building was owned at the time of the accident by the McManus Company or the Oregon Apartments Company, with instructions that it find a verdict of no cause of action in favor of the one which was determined not to be the owner. It also left to the jury, to
Section 20 of the Labor Law (Consol. Laws, chap. 31 [Laws of 1909, chap. 36], as since re-enacted by Laws of 1911, chap. 693, and Laws of 1913, chap. 492) provides in part that “If a building in course of construction is five stories or more in height, no lumber or timber needed for such construction shall be hoisted or lifted on the outside of such building.” Koch’s liability is predicated upon a violation of this provision of the section. It was undisputed, and the court so instructed the jury, that aside from the fact that Koch was having the lumber hoisted on the outside instead of on the inside of the building there was nothing whatever to show negligence on his part or to connect him with the accident. The violation of the statute was not the proximate cause of the accident; in fact it had nothing to do with it. It may be that if the plaintiff had not been upon the ground he would not have been hit by the board, but the hoisting of the lumber had no more to do with his being hit by a board falling or being thrown from some place in the building than it would had it been thrown from the street. The violation of a statute makes a prima facie case of negligence only where it can be said to be the cause of or in some way connected with the injury sustained; in other words, it must appear that the violation of the statute, before liability can be predicated thereon, was the proximate cause of the injury. (Weinberger v. Kratzenstein, 71 App. Div. 155; Koch v. Fox, Id. 288; Stewart v. Ferguson, 34 id. 515.)
I am of the opinion, therefore, that the motion to dismiss the complaint as to Koch should have been granted.
I am also of the opinion that the evidence did not justify a verdict against the Oregon Apartments Company. The uncon
It follows that the judgment and order appealed from must be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed, with costs.
Laughlin, Scott and Hotchkiss, JJ., concurred; Ingraham, P. J., dissented from dismissal of complaint as to defendant Koch.