Opinion
June 23, 1936.
Appeal from Supreme Court of New York County.
Joseph A. Nickerson of counsel [ Stanley D. Brown and E. Douglas Hamilton with him on the brief; Sackett, Chapman, Brown Cross, attorneys], for the appellant.
H.H. Brown of counsel [ E.C. Sherwood, attorney], for the respondents.
Present — MARTIN, P.J., McAVOY, UNTERMYER, DORE and COHN, JJ.
The plaintiff testified that the rubber mats or runners were used as part of the equipment of the lobby of the hotel, which was conceded by the answer of each defendant to have been under defendant's control. At the time of the accident the mats were being washed with soap and water in front of the defendants' premises. From these facts an inference may be made that the defendants' property while being cleaned in front of the premises was within the control of the employees. To repel that inference it was incumbent on the defendants to offer proof to the contrary. Nor can it be held as matter of law that the flooding of the sidewalk with soapy water does not create a dangerous condition.
The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.
Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.