Freed v. State University

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Freed v. State University

70 A.D.2d 783, 417 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12291

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 22, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 70 A.D.2d 783 (Freed v. State University) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Freed v. State University, 70 A.D.2d 783, 417 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12291 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Claimant was seriously injured when he slipped on an accumulation of water in his dormitory apartment at the State University. The water had overflowed from a toilet in the apartment. It was claimant’s contention that the toilet was defective, that it had been so for some time, that the State had notice of the defect and its employees were negligent in failing to correct it. The trial court dismissed the claim, finding that claimant had failed to prove negligence and his freedom from contributory negligence. The findings are within the province of the Trial Judge and since they are [784]*784not contrary to the weight of evidence, we do not disturb them (see Dittman v State of New York, 51 AD2d 859). (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims — negligence.) Present — Cardamone, J. P., Simons, Hancock, Jr., Callahan and Moule, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Claimant was seriously injured when he slipped on an accumulation of water in his dormitory apartment at the State University. The water had overflowed from a toilet in the apartment. It was claimant’s contention that the toilet was defective, that it had been so for some time, that the State had notice of the defect and its employees were negligent in failing to correct it. The trial court dismissed the claim, finding that claimant had failed to prove negligence and his freedom from contributory negligence. The findings are within the province of the Trial Judge and since they are [784]*784not contrary to the weight of evidence, we do not disturb them (see Dittman v State of New York, 51 AD2d 859). (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims — negligence.) Present — Cardamone, J. P., Simons, Hancock, Jr., Callahan and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 A.D.2d 783, 417 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freed-v-state-university-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack