
    HAAS v. KETCHAM.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    March 24, 1904.)
    1. Landlord and Tenant—Eviction—What Constitutes—Assault by Servant.
    A single assault, committed by a hall boy upon a tenant, conceding that it can be imputed to the landlord, is not such an interference with the beneficial use and possession of the demised premises as. to amount to an eviction.
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Tenth District.
    Action by Frederick Haas'against Augusta A. Ketcham. From a judgment of the Municipal Court for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
    Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and SCOTT and BLANCHARD, JJ.
    
      Reid, Esselstyn & Ketcham, for appellant.
    Otto- H. Droege, for respondent.
   BLANCHARD, J.

There was no proof in this case ot eviction actual or constructive. if the assault committed by the boy upon the defendant could be imputed to- the landlord, still this single act would not constitute such an interference with the beneficial use and possession of the demised premises as to amount to an eviction. The assault in no way related to or affected the defendant’s possession.

The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.  