Legal Opinion

O'Neill v. Dan Cohen Co.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 15, 1935No. 4771PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By ROSS, PJ.

We are cited to no case wh’ch even remotely suggests the propriety of a recovery under any of the theories presented, nor are we able to find any, and we would be surprised if such existed. Such authorities as there are hold the contrary.

This is not a case where an article of wearing apparel is made to order and constructed especially to fit the purchaser. The shoes were purchased in the ordinary course of trade, and even though the defendant may bo considered to have special skill in fitting shoes to .customer’s feet, it is obvious that no one can bell better than the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Dubbs v. Zak Brothers Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1931

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cavanagh v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API