Catharine Cartier v. F. M. Hoyt Shoe Catharine Cartier v. F. M. Hoyt Shoe

Catharine Cartier v. F. M. Hoyt Shoe

1942.NH.76, 29 A.2D 423, 92 N.H. 263

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

The evidence warranted a finding that the tread at the edge of the floor from which the plaintiff stepped to go down the stairway was so worn as to make its condition one of negligent maintenance. She testified: "The top landing was not even. It was grooved in, I would say, about an inch. In other words, the edge of it was worn and looked very slippery looking." While some wear of stair treads is to be expected and creates no demand for repair, the point at which the wear has become so great as to make the stairs unduly hazardous is one of fact, and the evidence quoted tended to show that the danger point had been passed.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1942
1 December
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
2
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
58.7
KB

More Books by Supreme Court of New Hampshire

A. Perley Fitch Company v. Continental A. Perley Fitch Company v. Continental
1954
George W. Roberts v. Tamworth & A. George W. Roberts v. Tamworth & A.
1950
Morris Rosenblum & A. v. John F. Griffin Morris Rosenblum & A. v. John F. Griffin
1938
Roy Rudolph v. Romeo J. Lavigne Roy Rudolph v. Romeo J. Lavigne
1943
State New Hampshire v. Virginia Renfrew State New Hampshire v. Virginia Renfrew
1982
Hydraform Products Corporation v. American Hydraform Products Corporation v. American
1985