Hedervary v. Lord & Taylor
This text of 280 A.D. 898 (Hedervary v. Lord & Taylor) 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.
Opinion
Action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff resulting from the explosion of a smock which she purchased from defendant Lord & Taylor, which bought the smock from appellant, which in turn purchased the material from defendant Lowenstein. Plaintiff was granted a preference under rule 4 of the Nassau County Supreme Court Rules on the theory that, since the cause of action alleged against all three defendants is for breach of warranty, this is an action on contract within the meaning of the rule. Only defendant Gerson-Kaufman Co., Inc., appealed from the order. Order insofar as appealed from reversed [899]*899on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements, motion denied, with $10 costs, and action against appellant severed. The rule in question does not contemplate a class of cases in which are sought damages for personal injuries, although the cause of action therefor is based nominally in contract. (Bobine V. Carleton Co., 239 App. Div. 833.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, MaeCrate and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
280 A.D. 898, 115 N.Y.S.2d 681, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hedervary-v-lord-taylor-nyappdiv-1952.