From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Pontifex v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
226 F.2d 909 (1955)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
E. J. Pontifex (plaintiff) was using a pull-start lawnmower manufactured by Sears, Roebuck & Company (Sears) (defendant). The rope that was used to start the lawnmower struck Pontifex in the eye, injuring her. The rope was not affixed to a spring-recoil mechanism, as this type of mechanism was not in use when Pontifex’s lawnmower was manufactured. Spring-recoil mechanisms were used in newer lawnmowers manufactured after Pontifex’s injury. Pontifex brought suit, alleging that Sears was negligent for not designing Pontifex’s lawnmower with a spring-recoil mechanism. The district court directed a verdict for Sears. Pontifex appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
