Clement v. Crosby & Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Certiorari to Wayne; Murphy, J. Case by Alice D. Clement against Crosby & Company and Arthur O. Q-. Rommeck for personal injuries. There was an order overruling a demurrer as to defendant Crosby & Company, and it brings certiorari.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.
The plaintiff brought an action to recover damages for a personal injury, received by her through burning, occasioned by the inflammable nature of a compound that she was using to polish a gas range. The defendants are the manufacturer of the compound, Crosby *295& Co., a corporation, and'one Arthur O. G. Rommeck, a retailer, and the declaration states .that she was led to purchase from the latter through her agent, and to use it by reason of the invitation, solicitation, and representations of the defendant Crosby & Co., it being sold without notice or warning of its dangerous nature.
The…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Wellington v. Downer Kerosene Oil Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Chipman v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Colegrove v. New York & New Haven RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Slater v. . MersereauNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Carter v. TowneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Comstock v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1959
- Antcliff v. State Employees Credit UnionMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
- Farley v. Edward E. Tower Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
- O'Brien v. American Bridge Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Eustace Weekes v. Michigan Chrome & Chemical Company, a Michigan Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.