Legal Opinion · Dissent

Martin v. Bartell Drug Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 21, 1930No. 21853. En BancPublished

1Dissent

Holcomb, J.,

(dissenting) — The rule followed by the majority, that a druggist is negligent who furnishes a harmful article instead of one not so harmful ordered by a customer, and that the rule as to an original package sale by a druggist has no application in this case, is correct, and is sustained by overwhelming authority. But there is more in this case than that.

Some most important facts are not mentioned in the prevailing opinion and referred to only in a very general way.

Both these compounds .are anthelmintic in effect. Neither is highly poisonous. Either is more toxic in effect when…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hendry v. Judge & Dolph Drug Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1922
  2. Gwynn v. DuffieldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1883

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

Powered by the Exa API