Case Name: Helen Jools, Respondent, v. Schatz Halpun Catering Corp., Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1956-10-25
Citations: 5 Misc. 2d 613
Docket Number: 
Parties: Helen Jools, Respondent, v. Schatz Halpun Catering Corp., Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 613–613

Head Matter:
Helen Jools, Respondent, v. Schatz Halpun Catering Corp., Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
October 25, 1956.
A. S. Bernstein and Bernard Helfenstein for appellant.
Louis George Rudd for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
There is no proof in the record of any negligence on the part of the defendant, nor is there any competent testimony to indicate the cause of the accident. The mere happening of the accident without any proof of the cause thereof does not give rise to a cause of action (Beutenmiller v. West End Tavern, 285 App. Div. 820, affd. 1 N Y 2d 652). The refusal of the court below to dismiss the complaint at the conclusion of plaintiff's case was, therefore, improper, and the judgment in favor of plaintiff may not be permitted to stand.
The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.
Eder, Hecht and Tilzer, JJ., concur.
Judgment reversed, etc.