## Facts

- Edward Dupre was a guest at a hotel owned and operated by Maryland Management Corporation.
- Jones, a hotel bellboy, became involved in a physical altercation with Dupre.
- The trial court found that Dupre initiated the encounter by assaulting Jones and threatening further assault.
- The record showed Jones twice tried to avoid a physical encounter before striking Dupre.
- After being assaulted and threatened, Jones struck Dupre with his fist in self-defense, fracturing Dupre’s jaw.
- There was no credible evidence that Jones continued attacking after Dupre was incapacitated.
- Dupre obtained a judgment for damages against the hotel based on the trial court’s finding that Jones used more force than necessary in self-defense.
- The hotel appealed from the judgment imposing liability.

## Issues

1. Whether a defensive punch that fractures an aggressor’s jaw constitutes excessive force in self-defense when the defender attempted to avoid the fight and did not continue the attack after incapacitation.
2. Whether, absent proof of excessive force, the hotel could be held liable for the bellboy’s conduct.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division unanimously reversed the judgment against Maryland Management Corporation.
- The court held the evidence did not support the finding that Jones used excessive force in self-defense.
- The complaint was dismissed on the merits as to the hotel, with costs to the appellant.

## Legal Principles

- Serious injury resulting from a defensive blow does not, by itself, prove excessive force.
- Excessive force in self-defense requires proof that the defender knew the force used would be excessive and intended to inflict unnecessary injury.
- A person acting under a dangerous attack is not required to exercise “detached reflection” or precisely anticipate the effect of a punch.
- Where the underlying conduct is justified self-defense rather than an actionable assault, vicarious liability against the employer based on that conduct does not stand.

## Conclusion

Because Dupre was the aggressor and the bellboy’s response was a limited defensive use of his fists without continued attack after incapacitation, the evidence did not establish excessive force; the judgment against the hotel was reversed and the complaint dismissed on the merits as to that defendant.


Dupre v. Maryland Mgmt. Corp., 283 A.D. 701, 127 N.Y.S.2d 615 (1st Dep’t 1954)