McGuiness v. Roux Distributing Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

McGuiness v. Roux Distributing Co.

19 Misc. 2d 956, 196 N.Y.S.2d 164, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3504

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided June 11, 1959·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff failed to establish that the hair dye she purchased contained any deleterious substance. This is á necessary element. (Karr v. Inecto, Inc., 247 N. Y. 360.) The occurrence of skin damage is not such proof unless other possible causes are excluded by competent professional testimony. (Cahill v. Inecto, Inc., 208 App. Div. 191; see Karr v. Inecto, Inc., supra, p. 364.)

The judgment should be reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs to appellant.

Concur — Steueb, J. P., Hoestadteb and Aurelio, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff failed to establish that the hair dye she purchased contained any deleterious substance. This is á necessary element. (Karr v. Inecto, Inc., 247 N. Y. 360.) The occurrence of skin damage is not such proof unless other possible causes are excluded by competent professional testimony. (Cahill v. Inecto, Inc., 208 App. Div. 191; see Karr v. Inecto, Inc., supra, p. 364.)

The judgment should be reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs to appellant.

Concur — Steueb, J. P., Hoestadteb and Aurelio, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

McGuiness v. Roux Distributing Co., 19 Misc. 2d 956, 196 N.Y.S.2d 164, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3504 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

19 Misc. 2d 956 (McGuiness v. Roux Distributing Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related