Legal Opinion

Driver v. F. W. Woolworth Co.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 16, 1938PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, P. J.

Judgment was obtained in the Court of Common Pleas by the plaintiff, appellee in this court, upon a petition wbicb, in substance, averred tbat tbe defendant, appellant bere, did sell to tbe plaintiff a certain article of beauty preparation known as and described as “Pinaud’s Six-Twelve Runproof Mascara,” representing same to be in all respects a proper cosmetic to use on this plaintiff’s eyebrows and eyelashes; that plaintiff purchased a tube of the same in reliance upon the representations; that, after the application of said mascara to her eyebrows and eyelashes, she was seriously infected…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. HughesOhio Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Reynolds v. Burgess Sulphite Fibre Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1902

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Poulos v. Parker Sweeper Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Levin v. Cleveland Welding Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1963
  3. Welsh v. GibbonsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1948
  4. Knob v. Copeland Refrigeration Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1963
  5. Sorg Paper Co. v. MurphyDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1986

1 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