Gimenez v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
The evidence permitted the finding by the jury that the plaintiff wife relied on the seller’s skill or judgment in the purchase of the crab meat in question, and that she purchased the same, not as agent for her husband but in her own behalf and for her own use as food. The evidence further justified the finding that the crab meat was not of merchantable quality, and that it was not fit for human consumption because of the presence therein of a dangerous substance from which ensued the injuries complained of. Under both propositions, lack of merchantable quality and unfitness of the food for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ryan v. Progressive Grocery Stores, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Boyce v. . Greeley Square Hotel Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Gimenez v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Bernstein v. Queens County Jockey ClubAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
- Price v. National Surety Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- O'Hare v. PetersenCity of New York Municipal Court · 1940
- Varone v. CalarcoNew York Supreme Court · 1960
- Gimenez v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
- Greco v. S. S. Kresge Co.New York Supreme Court · 1937