The following excerpt is from Sawyer v. Dreis & Krump Mfg. Co., 493 N.E.2d 920, 502 N.Y.S.2d 696, 67 N.Y.2d 328 (N.Y. 1986):
Plaintiff also contends that the judgment may stand because the jury specifically found in his favor on the products liability claim and the amnesia charge related only to the negligence cause of action. The court did not limit the amnesia charge to the negligence cause of action, but more importantly, it was plaintiff's burden to prove how the accident happened in both causes of action. Specifically, he was required to prove in the products liability claim that the machine was being used at the time " 'for the purpose and in the manner normally intended' "(Voss v. Black & Decker Mfg. Co., 59 N.Y.2d 102, 106, 463 N.Y.S.2d 398, 450 N.E.2d 204, supra:
Page 701
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.