Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lastowski v. Norge Coin-O-Matic, Inc.

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

Decided April 8, 1974Published

1Dissent

Justice Hopkins,

in his dissent states: “ Transposed to the parent-child relationship in the family, the rule of liability logically should therefore be whether the parent acted as a reasonable parent would have acted under the circumstances. TMs was the rule adopted in California (Gibson v. Gibson, 3 Cal. 3d 914, supra), which, in my opinion, best fits the factual and legal patterns implicit in the family structure.” (P. 142)

I can think of no better answer to that contention than to quote from Judge Fuld’s dissent in Badigian v. Badigian (9 N Y 2d 472, 481, supra), the sense of wMch was…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Goller v. WhiteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Gibson v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Hartfield v. RoperNew York Supreme Court · 1839
  4. Cosgrove v. . OgdenNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  5. Silesky Ex Rel. Silesky v. KelmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968

19 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