From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miranda v. Schmidt Sons, Incorporated

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 6, 1994
200 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

January 6, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Hansel McGee, J.).


Contrary to respondents' contentions, the within appeal is properly before this Court (see, Cohen v. Cohen, 3 N.Y.2d 339, 344) and the IAS Court properly denied defendant-appellant's motion for summary judgment since the appellant could not demonstrate as a matter of law its inability to anticipate that its beer keg would be combined with a non-defective bung stopper in a way that created the potential for the bung to be explosively ejected. This appears to be "a case where the combination of one sound product with another sound product creates a dangerous condition about which" appellant had a duty to warn (Rastelli v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Co., 79 N.Y.2d 289, 298).

Appellant's arguments with respect to warranty and design defect were rendered moot when the respondents withdrew claims based on those theories before the trial verdict, and we do not reach them. We have considered the appellant's remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Miranda v. Schmidt Sons, Incorporated

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 6, 1994
200 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Miranda v. Schmidt Sons, Incorporated

Case Details

Full title:JUAN MIRANDA et al., Respondents, v. C. SCHMIDT SONS, INCORPORATED, et…

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

Date published: Jan 6, 1994

Citations

200 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
608 N.Y.S.2d 73

Citing Cases

Silipo v. Wiley

ht to take a direct appeal from the order denying their motion for summary judgment terminated upon entry of…