Hoppe v. Hoppe

724 N.Y.S.2d 65, 281 A.D.2d 595, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3095

 

RULE:

The duty not to negligently maintain explosives is a duty owed to all and is not simply a duty emanating from the parent-child relationship.

FACTS:

The plaintiff, the son, was entrusted by his father, the defendant, with a hammer and a container of nails that contained an "explosive nail gun cartridge". The son was injured when he hit the cartridge with the hammer, and it exploded. Plaintiff sued defendant father to recover damages for personal injuries. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. It was denied. The defendant appealed. 

ISSUE:

Does the plaintiff have a claim against the defendant, who is his father?

ANSWER:

Yes.

CONCLUSION:

The plaintiff possessed a cognizable claim that his injuries were proximately caused by defendant's alleged breach of a duty of care owed to the world at large, one that existed outside of, and apart from, a family relationship.

Click here to view the full text case and earn your Daily Research Points.