Legal Opinion

Marte v. W.O. Hickok Mfg. Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 15, 1990PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Milonas, J.

Plaintiff Roberto Marte, then 28 years old and an employee of third-party defendant Prudential-Feld Company, Inc., sustained a partial amputation of his right arm when it was caught in the rotating gears of a Linoprint 600 Machine designed and manufactured by defendant W.O. Hickok Manufacturing Co., Inc. It is plaintiffs’ contention that the device, utilized to make paper products used as school supplies was deficient and unsafe in a number of significant respects. The issues involved herein concern the discovery of certain material being sought by plaintiffs…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Saccente v. ToterhiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1970
  2. Barber v. Town of NorthumberlandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  3. Rosado v. Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Moak v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1994
  2. DiMichel v. South Buffalo Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Ranft v. LyonsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991
  4. Kane v. Her-Pet Refrigeration, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  5. Careccia v. EnstromAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

8 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