Legal Opinion

Newmark v. Gimbel's Incorporated

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided November 17, 1969PublishedCited by 143 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Francis, J.

This appeal involves the liability of a beauty parlor operator for injury to a patron’s hair and scalp allegedly resulting from a product used in the giving of a permanent wave. The action was predicated upon charges of negligence and breach of express and implied warranty. Trial was had before the county district court and a jury. At the close of the proof, the court ruled as matter of law that the warranty theory of liability was not maintainable because in giving a permanent wave a beauty parlor is engaged in rendering a service and not a…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1964
  2. McKisson v. Sales Affiliates, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Graham v. Bottenfield's, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1954
  5. Payne v. R. H. White Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by143 opinions

  1. Suter v. San Angelo Foundry & MacHine CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
  2. Feldman v. Lederle LaboratoriesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  3. H. Rosenblum, Inc. v. AdlerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
  4. Huddell v. LevinCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
  5. Cogdell v. Hospital Center at OrangeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1989

138 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API