From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Doyle v. Carborundum Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 2, 1959
9 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Opinion

November 2, 1959

Present — Nolan, P.J., Wenzel, Beldock, Murphy and Ughetta, JJ.


In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the appeal is from a judgment, entered on a motion for a directed verdict, dismissing the complaint. The appellant was injured as the result of the breaking of a grinding wheel or disc manufactured by respondent. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. There was no proof that respondent's method of manufacture was negligent or improper, and there was insufficient evidence that respondent failed to use due care in testing the wheel after the manufacture thereof to require submission of the evidence to the jury (see, e.g., Kalinowski v. Ryerson Son, 242 App. Div. 43, affd. 270 N.Y. 532; Welsh v. Cornell, 168 N.Y. 508; Matter of Case, 214 N.Y. 199, 203-204).


Summaries of

Doyle v. Carborundum Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 2, 1959
9 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)
Case details for

Doyle v. Carborundum Company

Case Details

Full title:WALTER DOYLE, Appellant, v. CARBORUNDUM COMPANY, Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 2, 1959

Citations

9 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Citing Cases

Bravo v. Tiebout Sons

There is no proof in this case that the procedures followed by the defendant were not those recognized and…

Beckles v. County of Westchester

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. The plaintiff failed to offer evidence sufficient to…