Kenney v. Wong Len

I. In support of the exception to the denial of the motion for a directed verdict the defendants contend, first, that they were under no duty to anticipate the presence of the mouse in the food, and second, that there is no recovery for fright caused by negligence in the absence of immediate physical injury.

As to the first ground, there was a duty to anticipate if ordinary men in - the defendants’ place would have foreseen the danger in acting for their customers’ safety. Whether they would or not is a question of fact to be determined affirmatively only if there is evidence tending to show…