Cullings v. Goetz
New York Court of Appeals
256 N.Y. 287, 176 N.E. 397 (1931)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Joseph Cullings (plaintiff) took his car to a garage for service and was injured by a defective sliding door. Edward Goetz (defendant), the owner of the business, leased the garage building from the Nickleys (defendants). Cullings filed a tort action against Goetz and the Nickleys. One of the issues at trial was whether the Nickleys had promised Goetz that they would fix the door. The trial court instructed the jury that if the Nickleys had promised to fix the door but had failed to do so, a verdict should be entered against Goetz and the Nickleys. After finding that the promise had been made and that the Nickleys had failed to repair the door, the jury entered a verdict against Goetz and the Nickleys. The Nickleys appealed, and the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division reversed the trial court’s judgment. Cullings then appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cardozo, C. J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.