Briley v. Parham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Briley v. Parham

277 A.D.2d 1054

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

DecidedNovember 27, 1950

StatusPublished

This text of 277 A.D.2d 1054 (Briley v. Parham) 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

Briley v. Parham, 277 A.D.2d 1054 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff as the result of her use of a certain hair coloring product, alleged to have been manufactured by defendant F. L. Lebeau, Inc., and sold to the plaintiff by defendant Parham, the first cause of action is for breach of warranty, and the second for negligence. Order denying the motion of defendant Parham to dismiss the complaint, or, in the alternative, each of the two causes of action, on the ground that on the face of the pleading of each cause of action sufficient facts are not alleged to constitute a cause of action; or in the further alternative, to require plaintiff to make the complaint more definite and certain and separately to state and number the causes of action, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ., concur; MaeCrate, J., not voting.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff as the result of her use of a certain hair coloring product, alleged to have been manufactured by defendant F. L. Lebeau, Inc., and sold to the plaintiff by defendant Parham, the first cause of action is for breach of warranty, and the second for negligence. Order denying the motion of defendant Parham to dismiss the complaint, or, in the alternative, each of the two causes of action, on the ground that on the face of the pleading of each cause of action sufficient facts are not alleged to constitute a cause of action; or in the further alternative, to require plaintiff to make the complaint more definite and certain and separately to state and number the causes of action, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ., concur; MaeCrate, J., not voting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

277 A.D.2d 1054, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/briley-v-parham-nyappdiv-1950.