From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cook v. Garside Sons, Inc.

Supreme Court, New York County
Jul 8, 1932
145 Misc. 577 (N.Y. Misc. 1932)

Opinion

July 8, 1932.

Coan Coan, for the plaintiffs.

Latson Tamblyn, for the defendant.


In MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. ( 217 N.Y. 382, at p. 389) the court, CARDOZO, J., writing the opinion, said: "There must be knowledge of a danger, not merely possible, but probable. It is possible to use almost anything in a way that will make it dangerous if defective. That is not enough to charge the manufacturer with a duty independent of his contract." The application of this language to the instant case requires the granting of the motion to dismiss the complaint. Although injury was a possible consequence of the defective construction of the heel, it was not a probable result. An ordinary heel of a shoe is not an article that is reasonably certain to place life and limb in peril when negligently constructed. (See, also, Field v. Empire Case Goods Co., 179 A.D. 253.)

The motion is granted, with ten dollars costs, and the complaint dismissed. Order signed.


Summaries of

Cook v. Garside Sons, Inc.

Supreme Court, New York County
Jul 8, 1932
145 Misc. 577 (N.Y. Misc. 1932)
Case details for

Cook v. Garside Sons, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JEAN R. COOK and Another, Plaintiffs, v. A. GARSIDE SONS, INC., Defendant

Court:Supreme Court, New York County

Date published: Jul 8, 1932

Citations

145 Misc. 577 (N.Y. Misc. 1932)
259 N.Y.S. 947

Citing Cases

Timpson v. Marshall, Meadows & Stewart

The heel of a shoe is not such an article that is reasonably certain to place life or limb in peril, even…

Timpson v. Marshall, Meadows Stewart

The heel of a shoe is not such an article that is reasonably certain to place life or limb in peril, even…