Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

71 Misc. 134

Feder v. Friedman

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1911

New York Supreme Court · decided 1911-03-15

<p>Negligence—Actions — Evidence — Injuries caused by falling objects. Where a sign belonging to defendant fell from the fifth story of his building and struck and injured plaintiff, a pedestrian, the rule of res ipsa loquitur applies.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 1953

1 state decisions

Relies on Reynolds v. . Van Beuren

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1911-03-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Seabury, J.

¶1The plaintiff sued to recover damages for personal injuries. While walking in front of Ho. 654 Broadway, Hew York city, the plaintiff was struck on the head by a sign belonging to the defendants which fell from the fifth floor of that building. These facts, in addition to the injuries which the plaintiff sustained, were sufficiently proved by the plaintiff at the trial. At the close of the case, the court dismissed the complaint. From the judgment entered upon that dismissal the plaintiff appeals to this court.

¶2Upon the facts proved, the case called for the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, and it was error to dismiss the complaint. Morris v. Strobel & Wilkin Co., 81 Hun, 1; McNulty v. Ludwig Co., 125 App. Div. 291; Reynolds v. Van Beuren, 10 Misc. Rep. 703; 51 App. Div. 632; 155 N. Y. 120. Whether or not the defendants had been guilty of negligence was, under the evidence, a question of fact for the jury to determine.

¶3Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

¶4Page and Bijub, JJ., concur.

¶5Judgment reversed.

/71/misc/134 · .json · Public domain