Pellegrino v. Clarence L. Smith Co.
This text of 172 A.D. 922 (Pellegrino v. Clarence L. Smith Co.) 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
Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event. We think that this case, on the present record, does not fall within the doctrine of Citrone v. O'Rourke Engineering Const. Co. (188 N. Y. 339). According to plaintiff’s testimony there was an assurance by defendant’s representative that no danger existed, and a promise of notification when danger should become imminent. This brings the case within the doc trine of Rice v. Eureka Paper Co. (174 N. Y. 385). Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Mills and Rich, JJ., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
172 A.D. 922, 156 N.Y.S. 1138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pellegrino-v-clarence-l-smith-co-nyappdiv-1916.