Legal Opinion

Tonsman v. Greenglass

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 29, 1924PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeCourcy, J.

It is a long established general rule that the manufacturer of a defective article is not liable to an ultimate consumer, who has purchased from a middleman, for injuries resulting from negligence in its manufacture, where there is neither fraud nor privity of contract, and the defective article is not inherently dangerous. Tompkins v. Quaker Oats Co. 239 Mass. 147, and cases cited. Windram Manuf. Co. v. Boston Blacking Co. 239 Mass. 123. 17 A. L. R. 674 note, and cases collected.

The courts generally, although on various grounds, recognize as an exception to this rule the liability of the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Mazetti v. Armour & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Davis v. Van Camp Packing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1920
  3. Tomlinson v. Armour & Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1908
  4. Parks v. C. C. Yost Pie Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1914
  5. Bishop v. WeberMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Carter v. Yardley & Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  2. Norfolk Coca-Cola Bottling Works, Inc. v. KrausseSupreme Court of Virginia · 1934
  3. Kenney v. Wong LenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1925
  4. Pelletier v. DupontSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1925
  5. Commonwealth v. AroneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928

31 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