Court Opinion

ID: 9444220
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:46:38.645987+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:46.711320
License: Public Domain

WILBUR K. MILLER, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
I do not agree with the statement in the court’s opinion that the evidence raised an issue for the jury as to whether The Hecht Company had exercised reasonable cafe to prevent injury to its customers. Transparent doors of this modern type, even though installed three in a row, do not seem to me to be potentially dangerous so as to require any sort of warning, guard or protection; therefore I do not think the jury should have been permitted to decide the company was negligent in so installing them. My view is that the plaintiff’s injury was. caused either by her own negligence or by the concurrence of her negligence with that of the other customer who opened the door from the outside and caused it to strike the plaintiff. I would reverse and direct the entry of a judgment in favor of The Hecht Company.
But, if it be assumed that the evidence did raise an issue for the jury, I think the court’s disposition of the matter is. correct.