Legal Opinion

Geoghegan v. Fox Co., Inc.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided February 5, 1926PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKeeler, J.

The appellant contends that the nature of a department store is such that owing to certain risks consequent upon its character, equipment and management, its owner is charged with a higher standard of care in his conduct of the same than in the pursuance of ordinary business operations, and that in law he is charged with the same responsibility toward persons entering his establishment, invited thereto for the transaction of business, as are carriers and inn-keepers, that is, that a standard of care differing in kind as well as in degree obtains in such a case. In support of this claim he…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Nehring v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
  2. Pomponio v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
  3. Dickerson v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
  4. Firszt v. Capitol Park Realty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
  5. Seabridge v. PoliSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Ward v. AverySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
  2. Smith v. Union & New Haven Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
  3. Johnson v. PulidySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
  4. Farkas v. HalliwellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
  5. Newell v. K. D. Jewelry Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1935

23 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