In Crawford v. City of New York , Joan Crawford sued the City of New York and Petrocelli Electric Co. for injuries suffered when a traffic pole fell on her head.
Since Petrocelli had a contract with the City to perform maintenance, Crawford invoked the doctrine of "res ipsa loquitur," and claimed Petrocelli breached its obligation to maintain the street fixture.
Petrocelli argued it didn't have actual or constructive notice of any danger, and was only required to perform repairs when notified by the City to do so. Petrocelli also claimed the doctrine didn't apply because the company didn't have exclusive control over the pole -- as "the public and fire department" supposedly had "unfettered access."
After the New York County Supreme Court denied Petrocelli's request to dismiss the case, the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed because the company was found to have lacked the requisite degree of control. (While Petrocelli had access to internal mechanisms, it wasn't responsible for the fixture's inspection or maintenance.)
Hide them wire hangers!
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Crawford v. City of New York