Simmons v. . Everson
Cases that cite this one
22 later published cases cite this decision.
- Wm. Tackaberry Co. v. Sioux City Service Co. (Iowa 1911)
- Morris v. Barrisford (New York Court of Common Pleas 1894)
- City of New York v. A-1 Jewelry & Pawn, Inc. (District Court, E.D. New York 2007)
- City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp. (District Court, E.D. New York 2004)
- Johnson v. Bryco Arms (District Court, E.D. New York 2004)
- Hall v. EI Du Pont De Nemours & Co., Inc. (District Court, E.D. New York 1972)
- Hill v. Way (Conn. 1933)
- Altemus v. Talmadge (D.C. Cir. 1932)
- City of Mansfield v. Bristor (Ohio 1907)
- West Muncie Strawboard Co. v. Slack (Ind. 1904)
- Barnes v. Masterson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1899)
- Butler v. Rafferty (N.Y. 2003)
- State v. Schenectady Chemicals, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Corcoran v. Banner Super Market, Inc. (New York Supreme Court 1962)
- Ferdinando v. Rosenthal (City of New York Municipal Court 1938)
- Garvey v. Public Service Co-Ordinated Transport & Public Service Electric & Gas Co. (N.J. 1935)
- Starcher v. South Penn Oil Co. (W. Va. 1918)
- Parsan v. . Johnson (N.Y. 1913)
- McNulty v. Ludwig & Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1912)
- Carmichael v. City of Texarkana (8th Cir. 1902)
- South Bend Manufacturing Co. v. Liphart (Ind. Ct. App. 1895)
- City of Valparaiso v. Moffitt (Ind. Ct. App. 1895)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
It is urged, in behalf of the defendants, that at most this is but a case of several independent acts of negligence committed by each, the joint effect of which caused the accident, and for which they are not jointly liable within the rule laid down in Chipman v. Palmer (77 N. Y. 51).
The case at bar does not belong to the class of actions arising out of acts or omissions which are simply negligent, and while the defendants did not intend by their several acts to commit the injury, their conduct created a public nuisance which is an indictable misdemeanor under the statutes of this state (Penal Code, §§ 385, 387; Vincett v. Cook, 4 Hun, 318) and at common law. (Regina v. Watts, 1 Salk. 357; S. C., 2 Ld. Raym. 856; 1 Buss. Cr. [5th ed.] 423 ; 2 Whar. Cr. Law, § 1410 ; Big. Torts, 237; Pol. Torts [2d ed.] 345 ; Stephens Dig. Cr. Law, art. 176; Indian P. C. § 268.)
Persons who by their several acts or omissions maintain a public or common nuisance, are jointly and severally liable for *324 such damages as are the direct, immediate and probable consequence of it. (Irvine v. Wood, 51 N. Y. 224, 230; Slater v. Mersereau, 64 id. 138; Timlin v. Standard Oil Co., 54 Hun, 44; Klauder v. McGrath, 35 Penn. St. 128; 1 Shear. & R. Meg. [4th ed.] § 122; Pol. Tort [2d ed.] 356.)
The fall of these four-story brick walls into the street, was. the direct and immediate consequences- of the several acts of the defendants in suffering the portions standing on their own lots to remain unsupported after they had visibly begun to-incline towards the street, and it was as obvious before as it was after the accident that if any part of the front wall fell, a. large part of it must, and that it would go into the street.
The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
All concur, except Vann, J., not voting.
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.