Legal Opinion
Ribley v. Harsco Corp.
New York Supreme Court
Decided December 17, 1975PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdward S. Conway, J.
This is a motion by the plaintiff for an order to compel the defendant to answer certain enumerated interrogatories which were served on it by the plaintiff.
The action on which the instant motion is predicated is to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained by the infant plaintiff on October 28, 1973 while operating a manure spreader manufactured by the defendant. The complaint alleges that while Deborah Ribley was picking up a rock to place in the manure spreader wagon in order to remove it from the field, her hair became caught and entangled in the connecting drive shaft…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publishing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Groben v. Travelers Indemnity Co.New York Supreme Court · 1965
- Abrams v. Vaughan & Bushnell Mfg. Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1971
- Ford Motor Co. v. O. W. Burke Co.New York Supreme Court · 1966
- Gellis v. G. D. Searle & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Wiseman v. American Motors Sales Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Ribley v. Harsco Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
- Thahill Realty Co. v. MartinCivil Court of the City of New York · 1976
- Giordano v. A&M Tool & Die Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Hirshberg v. Mayday Hardware & Supply Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984