From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sabloff v. Yamaha Motor Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Nov 8, 1971
59 N.J. 365 (N.J. 1971)

Opinion

Argued October 27, 1971 —

Decided November 8, 1971.

Appeal from Superior Court, Appellate Division, Kilkenny, P.J.A.D..

Mr. Daniel K. VanDorn argued the cause for appellants, Yamaha ( Messrs. Gleeson, Hansen and Pantages, attorneys). Mr. Guy H. Haskins, argued the cause for cross-appellants, Harley-Davidson ( Mr. Peter A. Piro, on the brief; Messrs. Haskins, Robottom and Hack, attorneys).

Mr. Leonard J. Felzenberg argued the cause for respondents ( Messrs. Roskein, Kronisch and Felzenberg, attorneys).


The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed for the reasons given in its opinion reported at 113 N.J. Super. 279.

We add that whenever the facts permit an inference that the harmful event ensued from some defect (whether identifiable or not) in the product, the issue of liability is for the jury, and the plaintiff is not necessarily confined to the explanation his expert may advance.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL, SCHETTINO and MOUNTAIN — 7.

For reversal — None.


Summaries of

Sabloff v. Yamaha Motor Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Nov 8, 1971
59 N.J. 365 (N.J. 1971)
Case details for

Sabloff v. Yamaha Motor Co.

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN E. SABLOFF, AN INFANT BY HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, HERBERT SABLOFF…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Nov 8, 1971

Citations

59 N.J. 365 (N.J. 1971)
283 A.2d 321

Citing Cases

Scanlon v. General Motors Corp.

As a rule the mere occurrence of an accident is not sufficient to establish that the product was not fit for…

Moraca v. Ford Motor Co.

Thus "whenever the facts permit an inference that the harmful event ensued from some defect (whether…