Freeman v. Rock-Hil-Uris, Inc., 284 N.E.2d 155 (NY 1972). · Go Syfert
Freeman v. Rock-Hil-Uris, Inc., 284 N.E.2d 155 (NY 1972). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Bracco v. Nu Image Associates, Group, Inc. (nyappdiv, 2015-09-16)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Bracco v. Nu Image Associates, Group, Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Ctr., 67 NY2d 743, 744 [1986]; Freeman v Rock-Hil-Uris, Inc., 30 NY2d 742, 743 [1972]; cf. Wachovsky v City of New York, 122 AD3d 724, 726 [2014]; Zalot v Zieba, 81 AD3d 935, 936 [2011]; Johnson v Sniffen, 265 AD2d 304, 304 [1999]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Sylvia Freeman Et Al., Appellants,
v.
Rock-Hil-Uris, Inc., Doing Business as New York Hilton Hotel, Respondent
New York Court of Appeals.
Apr 27, 1972.
284 N.E.2d 155
Herman Schmertz for appellants., Sherwin Rear and Bernard Helfenstein for respondent.
Fuld and Judges Scileppi, Bergan and Jasen Concur Judges Burke, Breitel and Gibson Dissent and Vote to Reverse and Grant a New Trial on the Ground That There Was an Issue of Fact With Respect to the Conduct of Hotel Employees in Placement of the Electric Cord Which Allegedly Caused the Accident.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
Memorandum.

Undoubtedly, the plaintiffs could rely on circumstantial evidence in their efforts to explain how the condition which is alleged to have precipitated the fall came about. Tet, even inferring that the condition was reasonably attributable to the acts of defendant or its agents there is a complete failure of proof on the issue of proximate cause. The record itself is vague, and relevant facts such as the length of the cord, its point of emanation or the immediate facts attending Mrs. Freeman’s movements just prior to the accident are conspicuously omitted.

[*744] The trial court’s action in dismissing the complaint for failure to make out a prima facie case should be sustained.

Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Scileppi, Bergan and Jasen concur; Judges Burke, Breitel and Gibson dissent and vote to reverse and grant a new trial on the ground that there was an issue of fact with respect to the conduct of hotel employees in placement of the electric cord which allegedly caused the accident.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.