Gensler v. Feinberg
Arthur Gensler and Another v. M. Feinberg. [Fn1]
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
In this action for goods sold and delivered and services rendered, there was a counterclaim for damages caused by the negligence of plaintiffs, and on that counterclaim, the case having been tried without a jury, there was a decision for defendant. Plaintiffs appeal from the resulting judgment.
Briefly, the evidence is that in doing the job plaintiffs opened a gas main; that gas escaped in large quantity; that plaintiffs notwithstanding used a blow torch near the leak in the main; and that an explosion resulted, causing the damage to the property of defendant which is the subject of his counterclaim. The evidence supports the findings for defendant both as to negligence and the resulting damage. There being no question of error otherwise, the judgment must be affirmed.
So ordered.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.