From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Block v. Empire State Doughnut Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1931
233 App. Div. 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)

Opinion

May, 1931.


Order denying motion of defendant Bogner to dismiss amended complaint as against him reversed upon the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and complaint as to him dismissed, with ten dollars costs. The mother was not acting as the agent of her child when she purchased the doughnuts, and consequently there was no privity of contract between the infant plaintiff and said defendant. ( Redmond v. Borden's Farm Products Co., Inc., 245 N.Y. 512; Smith v. Hanson, 228 App. Div. 634; Zotto v. Merkel Brothers, Inc., 229 id. 793.) Lazansky, P.J., Young and Scudder, JJ., concur; Davis, J., concurs in result upon the authorities cited but is not in accord with the principles stated; Carswell, J., dissents.


Summaries of

Block v. Empire State Doughnut Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1931
233 App. Div. 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)
Case details for

Block v. Empire State Doughnut Corporation

Case Details

Full title:HARRIETTE BLOCK, an Infant, by SOPHIE BLOCK, Her Guardian ad Litem…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 1, 1931

Citations

233 App. Div. 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)

Citing Cases

Parish v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

It is stoutly maintained that the infants cannot sue for breach of warranty in the absence of a contractual…

Greenberg v. Lorenz

We have dealt only with the precise issue presented — we have held that Sheila may recover because we regard…