This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Majestic (P) owned a building on Main Street, and Bohen was its tenant on the first floor. The Authority began to acquire properties to establish a public parking area. This required Authority to demolish several buildings. Authority entered into a contract with Toti to do the work. The structure next to P’s was at least 20 feet higher than P’s, and the abutting walls ran right up against each other. It was established by expert testimony that Toti did not properly remove the building. Toti used a wrecking ball, and each time the ball would strike, debris would fly. If the operator had used the ball properly, he would have chipped away at the top in a manner that would have sent the debris flying away from P’s building. The eventual result was that a 15 by 40-foot section fell on P’s roof causing a 25 by 40-foot break therein. The crane operator was heard to admit that he “goofed.” The trial court accepted that the work was hazardous but would not hold that it was a nuisance per se. The trial court ruled that Authority, not having exercised control over the manner and method could not be held liable for the negligent act of its independent contractor. P appealed, and it was reversed by the Appellate court. This appeal resulted.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.