Legal Opinion

Burkhardt v. Armour & Co.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 5, 1932PublishedCited by 100 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.

The complaint alleged in substance that the plaintiff’s decedent purchased from the defendant The Great Altantic and Pacific Tea Company, hereinafter referred to as the Tea Company, at its Rockville store, a can of corned beef prepared and packed by the defendant Armour & Company, which by reason of negligence of the latter contained, embedded and concealed in the beef, a dangerous piece of tin; also that the defendants in selling the same represented and warranted it safe and fit for consumption; that the decedent, although exercising due care, swallowed the piece of tin with results,…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Lovejoy v. MurraySupreme Court of the United States · 1866
  2. Ryan v. Progressive Grocery Stores, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Rinaldi v. . Mohican Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
  4. Ward v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
  5. Thornhill v. Carpenter-Morton Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915

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

3Cited by100 opinions

  1. Jacob E. Decker & Sons, Inc. v. CappsTexas Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Burkert v. Petrol Plus of Naugatuck, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  3. Moore v. Jewel Tea Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Mazziotti v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  5. Dean v. HershowitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935

95 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