Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Epstein v. M. Blumenthal & Co.

Connecticut Supreme Court
158 A. 234 (1932)


Facts

Epstein (plaintiff) sued a store, M. Blumenthal & Co. (Blumenthal) (defendant), and one of its employees or agents, Maurice Rundbaken (defendant), for injuries she suffered when she was struck by a ladder Rundbaken was carrying. The factual basis for Epstein’s negligence claim, as set forth in her complaint, was that Rundbaken had imprudently exited the Blumenthal shop while holding the ladder horizontally, at knee level, and without looking or giving any warning to pedestrians in the busy thoroughfare outside the storefront. Rundbaken ran into Epstein with the ladder, causing her to fall. At trial, however, Epstein presented evidence that Rundbaken had been using the ladder to place a sign in front of the store. After descending the ladder, he carried it toward the entrance of the store and then swung it around in order to enter. Epstein was struck when Rundbaken swung the ladder. The trial court instructed the jury that they could only find in Epstein’s favor if her injury and the defendants’ negligence matched the allegations set forth in her complaint. The jury returned a verdict, which the court accepted as to Blumenthal but rejected as to Rundbaken. The court instructed the jury to reconsider the verdict, emphasizing that the jury could not find Rundbaken liable for negligence unless the jury’s finding of negligence matched the negligence alleged in Epstein’s complaint. The jury then returned a verdict in favor of both defendants. Epstein appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Maltbie, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.