Legal Opinion

Beckett v. F. W. Woolworth Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided June 19, 1940No. Gen. No. 41,009PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hebel

This is an action for damages for an eye injury which the plaintiff claims was caused by poisonous and harmful substances contained in a tube of “Pinaud’s Six-Twelve Creamy Mascara, ’ ’ purchased by her from the retailer, F. W. Woolworth Company, the defendant. The manufacturer of the article is not a party to this action. The cause was submitted to a jury who rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff and assessed the damages at $11,250.

At the close of the plaintiff’s case and at the close of all the evidence, the defendant filed motions for directed verdicts; both motions were denied. After…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wiedeman v. KellerIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Geithman v. EichlerIllinois Supreme Court · 1914
  3. MacAndrews & Forbes Co. v. Mechanical Manufacturing Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Sloan v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1915
  5. Hobart v. YoungSupreme Court of Vermont · 1891

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Beckett v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API