Connolly v. Nicollet Hotel
Minnesota Supreme Court
95 N.W.2d 657 (1959)
- Written by Lauren Petersen, JD
Facts
The Nicollet Hotel (defendant) was hosting the 1953 National Junior Chamber of Commerce Convention. Various delegates and vendors at the convention served alcoholic beverages to attendees. Over the first couple days of the convention, a large number of cans and beer bottles accumulated on the hotel’s third-floor fire escape and on one of the adjoining sidewalks. An engineer working at the hotel observed this accumulation. Additionally, the assistant hotel manager received a report that water bags had been thrown from the hotel. Marcella Connolly (plaintiff) exited The Nicollet accompanied by a friend, Margaret Hansen. After walking several steps along the sidewalk parallel the hotel, Connolly heard an explosive sound and saw something hit the sidewalk in front of her. Connolly looked upward, and her left eye was hit by a mud-like substance. Connolly lost her balance and was caught by her friend. Connolly’s face and head became numb. Some of the mud-like substance was embedded in Connolly’s eye. The Nicollet’s assistant manager tried to help Connolly remove the substance using a cotton applicator. As a result of this accident, Connolly became blind in her left eye. Connolly sued The Nicollet for negligence. A jury found in favor of Connolly, awarding her $30,000. The Nicollet moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, arguing that there was no evidence that the substance that struck Connolly came from the hotel. The trial court granted The Nicollet’s motion. Connolly appealed, arguing that The Nicollet negligently failed control its guests.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Murphy, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.