Opinion · New York Court of Appeals
Maher v. Madison Square Garden Corporation
Maher v. Madison Square Garden Corp., 242 N.Y. 506 (New York Court of Appeals 1926)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- New York Court of Appeals
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Date
- 1926-01-24
- Topic
- general
Per Curiam. The evidence establishes that plaintiff’s intestate, a boy fourteén years of age, was drowned in a swhnming pool conducted for profit by the defendant. Though the swimming pool was crowded at the time, apparently no one saw the fatality. We know only that he was playing in the pool one afternoon and his dead body was found in another part of the pool the next morning, and that death was caused by asphyxiation. No inference can be drawn that by act or omission of the defendant or any of its employees the boy was placed in a position of danger which caused hi; death, or that any greater care by the defendant could have averted accident.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Maher v. Madison Square Garden Corporation. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 13 opinions
MAHERv.MADISON SQUARE GARDEN CORPORATION,242 N.Y. 506(1926)
MARGARET MAHER, as Administratrix of the Estate of PHILIP MAHER, Deceased,
Respondent,v.MADISON SQUARE GARDEN CORPORATION, Appellant, Impleaded
with Another.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
Decided January 24, 1926
Page 507
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
Walter L. GlenneyandBertrand L. Pettigrewfor appellant.Leon SandersandWalter E. Godfreyfor respondent.
Per Curiam.
The evidence establishes that plaintiff's intestate, a boy fourteen years of age, was drowned in a swimming pool conducted for profit by the defendant. Though the swimming pool was crowded at the time, apparently no one saw the fatality. We know only that he was playing in the pool one afternoon and his dead body was found in another part of the pool the next morning, and that death was caused by asphyxiation. No inference can be drawn that by act or omission of the defendant or any of its employees the boy was placed in a position of danger which caused his death, or that any greater care by the defendant could have averted accident. The judgments should be reversed and complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts.
HISCOCK, Ch. J., POUND, McLAUGHLIN, CRANE, ANDREWS and LEHMAN, JJ., concur; CARDOZO, J., absent.
Judgments reversed.