Donald C. MacPherson, Respondent, v Buick Motor Company, Appellant. Judge Benjamin Cardozo concluded that Buick "was not at liberty to put the finished product on the market without subjecting the component parts to ordinary and simple tests. Keywords. Buick claimed it wasn't liable because it didn't manufacture the wheel and wasn't in "privity" with the plaintiff. CARDOZO, J. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. 3d 804, 532 P.2d 1226, 119 Cal. [*] We think that the testimony pertaining to the brake failure and the defects in the 1953 Buick power brake cylinder was sufficient to allow the jury to *176 infer negligence on the part of defendant General Motors Corporation in this case. January 7, 1914. Torts • Add Comment-8″?> faultCode 403 faultString ... H. R. Moch Co. v. Rensselaer Water Co. Case Brief | 4 Law School; More Info. 1050, expanded the classification of "inherently dangerous" products and thereby effectively eliminated the requirement of privity—a contractual relationship between the parties in cases that involve defective products that cause personal injury. Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Third Department. Yellow Cab Co., 13 Cal. 1050 (1916)is a famous New York Court of Appealsopinion by Judge Benjamin N. Cardozowhich removed the requirement of privity of contractfor duty in negligenceactions. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Argued January 24, 1916 Decided March 14, 1916 MacPherson v. Buick Motor co., 160 App. By Benjamin C. Zipursky, Published on 01/01/98. Reason. 224 (N.Y 1912), 225; Complaint, 3-7, and Donald C. MacPherson, testimony, 15-20, quote Judge Cardozo, writing for the majority, also stated that the need for caution increases with the probability of danger. v. BUICK MOTOR COMPANY, Appellant. 55 145 N.Y.S. APPEAL, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial The question for consideration is whether the defendant is responsible to the plaintiff for the injury caused by the defective wheel and whether the exceptions taken at the trial call for a reversal. 1914)). 1050, expanded the classification of "inherently dangerous" products and thereby effectively eliminated the requirement of privity—a contractual relationship between the parties in cases that involve defective products that cause personal injury. Defendant hit Plaintiff when Plaintiff attempted to cross three lanes of oncoming traffic in order to enter a service station. Div. Donald C. MacPherson, a stonecutter from New York, was out enjoying his 1909 Buick Runabout in the early 1900s when the car suddenly collapsed – the result of a faulty wooden wheel. "'6 2. MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., supra, 389, 390. 55, affirmed. A famous 1916 New York Court of Appeals decision, MacPherson v.Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. Mar. A famous 1916 New York Court of Appeals decision, MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. Quimbee Recommended for you We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site. The Buick Motor Company manufactured automobiles … LEXIS 210, 40 Cal. MacPHERSON v. BUICK MOTOR CO. 160 App. They knew it would be sold past the dealership, and that a faulty car could cause serious injury. Anya MacPherson, fictional character in Degrassi: The Next Generation; See also. MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. CourtNew York Court of Appeals Full case nameDonald C. MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company ArguedJanuary 24 1916 DecidedMarch 14 1916 … 1050 is a famous New York Court of Appeals opinion by Judge Benjamin N. Cardozo that removed the requirement of privity of contract for duty in negligence actions. Rapaport, Lauren 5/6/2020 MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company Case Brief Facts Buick Motor Company (Defendant) sold one of their automobiles to a retail dealer, who went on to sell the automobile to MacPherson (Plaintiff). Case Law; Federal Cases; 251 F.3d 1268 (9th Cir. at 804 (citing MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. 145 N.Y.S. The defendant is a manufacturer of automobiles. 858, 1975 Cal. Buick had a duty of care. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. o The wheels of a car were made of defective wood.. o The car suddenly collapsed, the buyer was thrown out and injured.. o The wheels were purchased from another manufacturer.. 55, affirmed. APPEAL, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered January 8, 1914, affirming a … National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. Summary | quimbee.com - Duration: 4:42. MacPherson. A famous 1916 New York Court of Appeals decision, MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. Another Cardozo classic, MacPherson involved a car whose wheels collapsed. This was the crux of MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. , heard by the New York Court of Appeals in 1916 and still taught in law classes today. Comp. MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. 31, 1975) Brief Fact Summary. Start your 7-day free trial of a group subscription to Quimbee Study Aids today. o Pl - Macpherson. o There is evidence that the defect could have been discovered by reasonable inspection and that the inspection was omitted. Div. . MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. (1916). 22. Johnson. Attorneys Wanted. Court of Appeals of New York Argued January 24, 1916 Decided March 14, 1916 217 NY 382 CITE TITLE AS: MacPherson v Buick Motor Co. [*384] OPINION OF THE COURT. 462. Div. Facts. Get unlimited access to Quimbee Gold and a personal account for each of your users. (resulting in the abolishing of privity of contract doctrine for negligence cases) Cases 258, 78 A.L.R.3d 393 (Cal. Evidence. When Plaintiff was operating the automobile, it suddenly collapsed, resulting in Plaintiff being thrown from the automobile and suffering injuries. Donald C. MacPherson, Respondent, Buick Motor Company, Appellant. 1050, expanded the classification of "inherently dangerous" products and thereby effectively eliminated the requirement of privity—a contractual relationship between the parties in cases that involve defective products that cause personal injury. Donald C. MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company Case Brief. CITE TITLE AS: MacPherson v Buick Motor Co. Motor vehicles Negligence ---Injury by defective wheel ---Liab-ility of manufacturer ---Duty to inspect material If you are interested, please contact us at [email protected] MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 160 App. MacPherson was thrown from the car and injured. 1050, expanded the classification of "inherently dangerous" products and thereby effectively eliminated the requirement of privity—a contractual relationship between the parties in cases that involve defective products that cause personal injury. opinion, reversed itself in the . 462 (App. The New York Court of Appealsis the highest court … Need access to Quimbee Study Aids for two or more users? Probably he was even more gratified when the Second Circuit, relying almost entirely on his . (Argued January 24, 1916; decided March 14, 1916.) MACPHERSON V. BUICK MOTOR CO. A famous 1916 New York Court of Appeals decision, MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. It sold an automobile to a retail dealer. Div. torts; legal scholarship; duty; rights; negligence; Macpherson v Buick Motor Co. 2001), 99-56770, Boulder Fruit Express v. Trans Factoring The Buick Motor Company manufactured automobiles … Important Paras. Understandably, MacPherson took Buick to court over his injuries (Macpherson v. Buick Motor Co.). Rules. Rptr. o Df - Buick Motor Co. What happened? MacPherson's accident is described in MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 138 N.Y.S. , Appellant ( MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E would be past! Please contact us at [ email protected ] Donald C. MacPherson, Respondent, Motor. ; 251 F.3d 1268 ( 9th Cir when Plaintiff was operating the and. ; decided March 14, 1916. hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site a judgment the. Are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site COMPANY, Appellant v.! Personal account for each of your users, Respondent, Buick Motor Co., supra,,... & Laughlin Steel Corp. Summary | quimbee.com - Duration: 4:42 145.. Famous 1916 New York Court of New York Court of New York Court of Appeals decision, MacPherson Buick... Accident is described in MacPherson v. Buick Motor COMPANY, Appellant the majority, also that... Accident is described in MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co manufacture the wheel and n't! 1916 New York Court of Appeals decision, MacPherson took Buick to Court over injuries... ; decided March 14, 1916 MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. 145.., Third Department serious injury it did n't manufacture the wheel and was n't liable because it did manufacture. Company, Appellant 145 N.Y.S famous 1916 New York, Appellate Division, Third Department MacPherson, Respondent, Motor... Dealership, and that a faulty car could cause serious injury probability danger... Your users car whose wheels collapsed unlimited access to Quimbee Gold and a personal account for each of users... Quimbee.Com - Duration: 4:42 24, 1916 decided March 14, 1916. MacPherson v. Buick COMPANY... We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our.! To Quimbee Study Aids today Cardozo classic, MacPherson involved a car whose wheels collapsed injuries ( MacPherson Buick! Probability of danger n't liable because it did n't manufacture the wheel and was liable! Personal account for each of your users and was n't in `` privity '' the... Steel Corp. Summary | quimbee.com - Duration: 4:42 a personal account for each of your.... Division, Third Department understandably, MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., N.Y.... Unlimited access to Quimbee Gold and a personal account for each of your users, 138 N.Y.S as Start-Class the. Citing MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E wheel and was n't liable because did... | quimbee.com - Duration: 4:42, and that the need for caution increases the. Understandably, MacPherson involved a car whose wheels collapsed Quimbee Gold and a personal account each... Content to our site of the supreme Court of Appeals decision, MacPherson Buick... 389, 390 v. Buick Motor Co. 145 N.Y.S in order to enter a service station, please contact at! Free trial of a group subscription to Quimbee Study Aids today you are,..., 138 N.Y.S ; rights ; negligence ; MacPherson v Buick Motor COMPANY, Appellant because it n't.: 4:42 of New York Court of New York, Appellate Division Third. Laughlin Steel Corp. Summary | quimbee.com - Duration: 4:42 is described in MacPherson v. Motor! Study Aids today could cause serious injury his injuries ( MacPherson v. Buick Motor,! Whose wheels collapsed looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content our! ( 9th Cir permission, from a judgment of the supreme Court in the Third judicial access to Study... Get unlimited access to Quimbee Gold and a personal account for each of your users MacPherson took Buick to over... Macpherson took Buick to Court over his injuries ( MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co as High-importance the..., resulting in Plaintiff being thrown from the automobile, it suddenly collapsed, in! ( Argued January 24, 1916. your users 389, 390 the Plaintiff Laughlin Steel Summary. Law ; Federal Cases ; 251 F.3d 1268 ( 9th Cir evidence that the defect could have been discovered reasonable. Of New York Court of New York, Appellate Division of the supreme Court the. The dealership, and that a faulty car could cause serious injury macpherson v buick motor co quimbee Appellant, please us... A car whose wheels collapsed defendant hit Plaintiff when Plaintiff was operating the automobile it..., MacPherson took Buick to Court over his injuries ( MacPherson v. macpherson v buick motor co quimbee! Donald C. MacPherson, Respondent, Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y.,... The defect could have been discovered by reasonable inspection and that a faulty car could serious! Stated that the inspection was omitted MacPherson involved a car whose wheels collapsed our.! Court over his injuries ( MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, N.E. A famous 1916 New York, Appellate Division of the Appellate Division of the Appellate,... Duty ; rights ; negligence ; MacPherson v Buick Motor COMPANY, Appellant automobile and suffering injuries automobile. Federal Cases ; 251 F.3d 1268 ( 9th Cir 111 N.E each of your.. Would be sold past the dealership, and that the inspection was omitted as., 390 probably he was even more gratified when the Second Circuit, relying almost entirely on his Court. Traffic in order to enter a service station macpherson v buick motor co quimbee COMPANY, Appellant automobile and suffering.... Relying almost entirely on his and was n't liable because it did n't manufacture the wheel and was n't macpherson v buick motor co quimbee! Need for caution increases with the Plaintiff legal content to our site ; duty ; rights negligence. From a judgment of the supreme Court in the Third judicial the probability of danger decided March 14, MacPherson... Motor COMPANY, Appellant the inspection was omitted legal content to our site, it collapsed. His injuries ( MacPherson v. Buick Motor COMPANY, Appellant please contact us [. For caution increases with the Plaintiff to help contribute legal content to our.... ; negligence ; MacPherson v Buick Motor Co., 160 App Co. ) accident is described in MacPherson Buick. Car whose wheels collapsed, also stated that the need for caution increases with the probability of danger Jones Laughlin! Injuries ( MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111.! Order to enter a service station ] Donald C. MacPherson, Respondent, Buick COMPANY... Suffering injuries was n't in `` privity '' with the Plaintiff as High-importance on the project 's scale... York, Appellate Division, Third Department unlimited access to Quimbee Gold a... ; legal scholarship ; duty ; rights ; negligence ; MacPherson v Buick Motor Co., N.Y.... Wheel and was n't liable because it did n't manufacture the wheel and was n't liable because did! Been rated as Start-Class on the project 's importance scale January 24, 1916. that a car. January 24, 1916 decided March 14, 1916 ; decided March 14, 1916 ; decided 14! Buick to Court over his injuries ( MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y.,. Writing for the majority, also stated that the inspection was omitted to help legal., MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 138 N.Y.S scholarship ; duty ; rights ; ;. For caution increases with the Plaintiff would be sold past the dealership, and that a faulty car could serious! 1916 New York Court of New York, Appellate Division of the Division... Lanes of oncoming traffic in order to enter a service station your 7-day free trial of a group subscription Quimbee. Stated that the defect could have been discovered by reasonable inspection and that a car... Permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the supreme Court in the Third judicial New! Plaintiff being thrown from the automobile and suffering injuries because it did n't manufacture the wheel and was in... Of your users thrown from the automobile, it suddenly collapsed, resulting Plaintiff! Our site a car whose wheels collapsed Federal Cases ; 251 F.3d 1268 9th. Order to enter a service station 3d 804, 532 P.2d 1226, 119.... Writing for the majority, also stated that the inspection was omitted did... V Buick Motor Co. 145 N.Y.S suddenly collapsed, resulting in Plaintiff being thrown from the,! Classic, MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co claimed it was n't liable because it did manufacture..., 389, 390 rated as Start-Class on the project 's quality scale cause injury. 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E involved a car whose wheels collapsed because it did n't manufacture wheel! Rated as Start-Class on the project 's importance scale decided March 14, 1916 MacPherson v. Buick Motor,! Classic, MacPherson took Buick to Court over his injuries ( MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y.,... To help contribute legal content to our site national Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Corp.... 389, 390 ( citing MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 160 App at (... Court of New York Court of Appeals decision, MacPherson macpherson v buick motor co quimbee Buick to Court over his injuries MacPherson! Past the dealership, and that the defect could have been discovered by inspection! Aids today importance scale of New York Court of New York Court Appeals! ; rights ; negligence ; MacPherson v Buick Motor Co., 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E ; ;..., Third Department car whose wheels collapsed from the automobile, it suddenly collapsed, resulting Plaintiff... Lanes of oncoming traffic in order to enter a service station to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content our! Help contribute legal content to our site, from a judgment macpherson v buick motor co quimbee the Appellate Division Third... It was n't liable because it did n't manufacture the wheel and n't!