Campo v. Scofield case brief

Campo v. Scofield case brief summary
95 N.E.2d 802 (N.Y. 1951)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Appellant worker sought review of a decision by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, New York, which reversed a lower order that denied a motion for a dismissal of appellant's complaint under N.Y. C.P.L.R. 106 against appellee manufacturer alleging that appellee had been negligent in failing to equip a farm machine, on which appellant was injured, with a guard or stopping device.

CASE FACTS
Appellant worker was operating a farm machine purchased from appellee manufacturer when he caught his hands in the machine causing extreme injury. Appellant brought an action against appellee alleging that appellee had been negligent in failing to equip the machine with a guard or stopping device. The lower court dismissed the complaint.

DISCUSSION

• Upon appeal, the court affirmed, holding that because the duty owed by appellee to remote users did not require him to guard against hazards apparent to the casual observer or to protect against injuries resulting from appellant's own patently careless and improvident conduct, the complaint was properly dismissed. 
• The court found that appellee only had a duty to protect against latent dangers in the machine and that the machine was not defective.

CONCLUSION

The court affirmed the dismissal of appellant worker's complaint against appellee manufacturer in appellant's action for negligence following his injury while using a machine manufacturer by appellee because the dangers of the machine were obvious, appellee had no duty to provided guards against the obvious danger, and the machine was not defective.

Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law