Calabrese v. James McCreery & Co.

187 Misc. 538, 67 N.Y.S.2d 247, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3219
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided October 10, 1946·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Memorandum The court erred in refusing to charge as requested by defendant that it owed to the customer the exercise of reasonable care only. On the charge the jury here could have found for plaintiffs simply because the child was attracted to the opening, regardless of whether the place was reasonably safe or the defendant in the exercise of reasonable care could have anticipated a child’s fingers might go into the opening.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with $30 costs to defendant to abide the event.

MacCrate, Smith and Fennelly, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Calabrese v. James McCreery & Co., 187 Misc. 538, 67 N.Y.S.2d 247, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3219 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

187 Misc. 538 (Calabrese v. James McCreery & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Frein v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
204 Misc. 694 (New York Supreme Court, 1953)