From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Halsey v. Ford Motor Company, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 21, 1965
24 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Opinion

October 21, 1965

Appeal from the Steuben Trial Term.

Present — Williams, P.J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Del Vecchio, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and facts, without costs of this appeal to either party, and complaint dismissed, without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff's recovery is based upon a jury finding of breach of implied warranty of fitness of a cigarette lighter sold by defendants as an integral part of an automobile. The car was destroyed by fire after having been left unattended in a rural area. There was some proof that upon first discovery of the fire it was concentrated on the dash where the lighter was located. There is also proof that in the five months plaintiff had owned the car the lighter had malfunctioned but such had only occurred when the article was used. There is no proof that on the day in question it had been so used. Giving plaintiff the benefit of every favorable inference which can reasonably be drawn from the facts ( Sagorsky v. Malyon, 307 N.Y. 584, 586) we conclude that the trial court upon the proof adduced erred in submitting the issues to the jury. "When the precise cause of an accident is left to conjecture and may be as reasonably attributed to a condition for which no liability attaches as to one for which it does, then the plaintiff is not entitled to recover, and the evidence should not be submitted to the jury." ( White v. Lehigh Val. R.R. Co., 220 N.Y. 131, 135-136.)


Summaries of

Halsey v. Ford Motor Company, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 21, 1965
24 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)
Case details for

Halsey v. Ford Motor Company, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT F. HALSEY, Respondent, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, INC., et al.…

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

Date published: Oct 21, 1965

Citations

24 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Citing Cases

Smith v. Squire Homes, Inc.

In our view, the erroneous introduction of the expert's opinion prejudiced the defendants in their effort to…

Rebollal v. Payne

In essence, viewing this report most favorably to plaintiff, while the use of either methadone alone or in…