Legal Opinion

Goldhirsch v. American Character Doll Co.

City of New York Municipal Court

Decided January 3, 1930Published

1Opinion of the CourtNoonan, J.

The complaint sets forth two causes of action, one by Bernard Goldhirsch to recover for personal injuries, and the other by Max Goldhirsch, the father of Bernard, to recover for loss of services and for moneys expended for medical attendance. The causes of action are brought against a corporation which employed Bernard at the time he was injured and also against a fellow-employee of Bernard who it is alleged was che cause of the injuries suffered. In the complaint it is alleged that Bernard was assaulted by his fellow-employee and that his employer failed to use due care and prudence in the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Matter of Heitz v. . RuppertNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Matter of Scholtzhauer v. . C. L. Lunch Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1922
  3. Claim of Griffin v. A. Roberson & SonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
  4. Matter of Stillwagon v. . Callan BrothersNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
  5. Claim of Burke v. Towner Bros.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API