From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Norton v. Fello

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Jan 29, 1960
23 Misc. 2d 924 (N.Y. App. Term 1960)

Opinion

January 29, 1960

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York, Queens County, MARIO J. CARRIELLO, J.

Hampton Dietel ( William F. McNulty of counsel), for appellants.

Wolinsky Wolinsky ( Melvin Wolinsky of counsel), for respondent.


The theory of the action, as pleaded, was breach of warranty. The determination made below was based solely upon negligence. A new trial is required since the issues presented in the breach of warranty action were not considered or passed upon.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and facts and a new trial ordered, with costs to defendants to abide the event.

Concur — HART, DI GIOVANNA and BROWN, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Norton v. Fello

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Jan 29, 1960
23 Misc. 2d 924 (N.Y. App. Term 1960)
Case details for

Norton v. Fello

Case Details

Full title:ANNE NORTON, Respondent, v. DOLORES FELLO et al., Doing Business as CHIC…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Jan 29, 1960

Citations

23 Misc. 2d 924 (N.Y. App. Term 1960)
206 N.Y.S.2d 229