From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beckhusen v. Lawson Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 2, 1961
174 N.E.2d 327 (N.Y. 1961)

Opinion

Argued January 18, 1961

Decided March 2, 1961

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, FRANCIS X. CONLON, J.

Bennett E. Aron and Harry Zeitlan for appellant.

Paul A. Crouch, George S. Pickwick and George J. Conway for respondent.


We are of the opinion that the jury had the right to find that defendant's design of the guillotine-type paper-cutting machine in such a manner as to permit the access doors to interfere with the safety mechanism, without at least warning the operator of the hazard foreseeable by it, was negligence, and that the negligent design of this dangerous instrumentality was the proximate cause of plaintiff's injury. It was, therefore, unnecessary for plaintiff to show precisely how or why the door opened.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, FROESSEL, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE and FOSTER concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Beckhusen v. Lawson Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 2, 1961
174 N.E.2d 327 (N.Y. 1961)
Case details for

Beckhusen v. Lawson Company

Case Details

Full title:GERHARD F. BECKHUSEN, Appellant, v. E.P. LAWSON COMPANY, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 2, 1961

Citations

174 N.E.2d 327 (N.Y. 1961)
174 N.E.2d 327
214 N.Y.S.2d 342

Citing Cases

McLaughlin v. Mine Safety Appliances Co.

The court instructed the jury that, if they found that the heating block was an inherently dangerous article,…

Byrnes v. Economic Machinery Co.

Liability can be predicated on a safety device's failure to work under some conditions. See Hartmon v.…