Cahill v. Inecto, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Dowling, J.:
This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff by reason of the applications to plaintiff’s head of a hair dye manufactured by defendant, known as “ Inecto Rapid,” which it advertises and represents to the general public as suitable for use as a hair dye and for application to the head as such. It is alleged in the complaint that, by reason of the carelessness, recklessness and negligence of the defendant herein, the said “ Inecto Rapid ” was inherently dangerous to the skin, and if applied thereto would cause rashes, burnings, itches and…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Karr v. Inecto, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Spiegel v. Saks 34th StreetAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1964
- Bender v. William Cooper & Nephews, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1944
- Ravo v. LidoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
- Steber v. KohnCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1945
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.