From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burgess v. Garfield 49th Street

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Dec 15, 1955
1 Misc. 2d 60 (N.Y. App. Term 1955)

Opinion

December 15, 1955

Appeal from the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Queens, DUGAN, J.

Allen Redlich, Samuel Schub and Milton B. Pfeffer for appellant.

Melville Harris, William A. Hyman and Harold W. Hayman for respondent.


Defendant was under a duty to use ordinary care to protect the patrons of its restaurant from injury from causes reasonably to be anticipated. (See Schubart v. Hotel Astor, 168 Misc. 431, affd. 255 App. Div. 1012, affd. 281 N.Y. 597; also see, Smith v. White Tower Management Corp., 129 N.Y.S.2d 545, and cases there cited.) However, it was not expected to anticipate the unusual and abnormal. ( Futterer v. Saratoga Assn., 262 App. Div. 675. ) The sudden and unexpected hurling of a sugar bowl by an unruly patron during an altercation was not such an act which defendant could fairly and reasonably be expected to have foreseen or guarded against. No actionable negligence on its part was otherwise established.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed, upon the law and facts, with $30 costs to defendant, and complaint dismissed, with appropriate costs in the court below.

KLEINFELD, PETTE and DI GIOVANNA, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Burgess v. Garfield 49th Street

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Dec 15, 1955
1 Misc. 2d 60 (N.Y. App. Term 1955)
Case details for

Burgess v. Garfield 49th Street

Case Details

Full title:HARRY BURGESS, Respondent, v. GARFIELD 49TH STREET, INC., Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Dec 15, 1955

Citations

1 Misc. 2d 60 (N.Y. App. Term 1955)
149 N.Y.S.2d 55

Citing Cases

Kuzmack v. Walsh

Per Curiam. Defendants were under a duty to use ordinary care to protect their patrons from injury from…

Kohler v. Wray

Rather, when asked whether his alleged assailant appeared intoxicated, plaintiff responded with a surmise: "I…