Legal Opinion

Deeves v. Fabric Fire Hose Co.

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 11, 1961PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJames D. Hopkins, J.

The defendant moves to dismiss the second cause of action alleged in the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. That cause of action, briefly stated, alleges that the plaintiff, an employee of the City of New Rochelle, suffered personal injuries as a result of the bursting of fire hose purchased by the city from the defendant; that the injury occurred while the plaintiff was testing the hose under pressure prior to use in fighting fires; and that the defendant, both by express and implied warranties, had represented that the hose would…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Campo v. ScofieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1950
  2. Boston Woven Hose & Rubber Co. v. KendallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
  3. Chysky v. . Drake Brothers Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
  4. Pond v. . New Rochelle Water Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1906
  5. Gimenez v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1934

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Deeves v. Fabric Fire Hose Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API