Legal Opinion
Brown v. Daisy Manufacturing Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 3, 1987No. Appeal No. 1PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Plaintiffs’ use of the adjective "all” does not render their request impermissible per se; it is the subject of the request that defines whether the request is specific (Stevens v Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 117 AD2d 733, 734). Discovery of similar subsequent accidents is permissible because such proof may be admissible at trial to establish the existence of a defect (Carnibucci v Marlin Firearms Co., 51 AD2d 1067).
Defendant asserts, however, that it has no documents…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Stevens v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Carnibucci v. Marlin Firearms Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- Frasier v. ConklinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hodgson, Russ, Andrews, Woods & Goodyear, LLP v. Isolatek International Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Kolody v. Supermarkets General Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Winiecki v. Melroe Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Hardy v. Tops Markets, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Sisters of St. Francis of Holy Name Province, Inc. v. Daemen CollegeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990