Willigan v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

33 A.D.2d 1033, 308 N.Y.S.2d 74, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5586
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 9, 1970·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated June 4, 1969, which denied its motion for summary judgment (CPLR 3212) or, in the alternative, for judgment dismissing the second cause of action for its failure to state a cause of action (CPLR 3211, subd. [a], par. 7). Order reversed, on the law, without costs, and motion for summary judgment granted. In the absence of any claim that the firearm was defective when sold, it is our opinion that defendant, which sold a rifle to a 17-year-old boy, such sale not being prohibited by statute (cf. former Penal Law, § 1898, subd. 5, which provided that the seller of a firearm to a minor under the age of 16 years is guilty of a misdemeanor), cannot be held liable for an injur;' to a third person resulting from the negligent or improper use of the rifle by the purchaser (cf. Corey v. Kaufman & Chernick, 70 R. I. 27; Wyllie v. Palmer, 137 N. Y. 248). Beldoek, P. J., Christ, Rabin, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Willigan v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 33 A.D.2d 1033, 308 N.Y.S.2d 74, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5586 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

33 A.D.2d 1033 (Willigan v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Earsing v. Nelson
212 A.D.2d 66 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Hulsman v. Hemmeter Development Corp.
647 P.2d 713 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1982)
Hetherton v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.
445 F. Supp. 294 (D. Delaware, 1978)