Legal Opinion
Putnam v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided November 28, 1939PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCox, J.
The plaintiff's action of contract is based on the alleged breach of implied warranty of fitness of food purchased from the defendant. The trial judge, upon leave reserved, ordered the entry of a verdict for the defendant, and the plaintiff excepted. The jury could have found that she became ill after eating the food. It is unnecessary to detail the events prior and subsequent to her illness, or to determine whether the evidence would warrant findings that the food was unwholesome and the probable cause of her illness or whether it was purchased in such circumstances as to give her any…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Johnson v. KanavosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- Schuler v. Union News Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
- Idzykowski v. Jordan Marsh Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
- Nashua River Paper Co. v. LindsayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
- Jamrog v. H. L. Handy Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Pearl v. Wm. Filene's Sons Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
- Bruns v. Jordan Marsh Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Murphy v. Gilchrist Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
- Cavanagh v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
- Monroe Auto Equipment Co. v. BloomMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.