Lugo v. LJN Toys, Ltd.
Cases that cite this one
39 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Acquisto v. Manitowoc Co. (District Court, W.D. New York 2017)
- Port Authority of New York and New Jersey v. Arcadian Corp Dyno Nobel Inc, F/k/a, Ireco Incorporated Hydro Agri North America, Inc (3d Cir. 1999)
- Porrazzo v. Bumble Bee Foods, LLC (District Court, S.D. New York 2011)
- Beneway v. Superwinch, Inc. (District Court, N.D. New York 2002)
- The Matter of the Eighth Judicial District Asbestos Litigation v. Donald J. Terwilliger (N.Y. 2019)
- Port Auths. of NY & NJ v. Arcadian Corp. (3d Cir. 1999)
- Liriano v. Hobart Corp. (N.Y. 1998)
- Harper v. United States (District Court, E.D. New York 1996)
- Ake v. General Motors Corp. (District Court, W.D. New York 1996)
- Denny v. Ford Motor Co. (N.Y. 1995)
- Velsini v. Cadmus (District Court, N.D. New York 1994)
- Wisner v. Farquhar (District Court, N.D. New York 1994)
- Campbell v. BIC Corp. (New York Supreme Court 1992)
- Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Pentair Residential Filtration, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
- Brodie v. Green Spot Foods, LLC (District Court, S.D. New York 2020)
- Sofia Fasolas v. Bobcat of New York, Inc (N.Y. 2019)
- Hockler v. William Powell Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Reis v. Volvo Cars of North America, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
- Young v. Daglian (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
- Giannotti v. Mercedes Benz U.S.A. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- Kosicki v. Spring Garden Ass'n (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
- Estrada v. Berkel Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- Repka v. Arctic Cat, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- Watson v. Scott McLaughlin Truck & Equipment Sales (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- Mercogliano v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.
Plaintiffs instituted this action to recover for personal injuries sustained when the infant plaintiff was struck in the eye by part of a toy manufactured by defendant and thrown by a playmate. They claim that the toy, a doll known as "VoltronDefender of the Universe”, was a replica of a well-known
A manufacturer who sells a product in a defective condition is liable for injury which results to another when the product is used for its intended purpose or for an unintended but reasonably foreseeable purpose (see, Micallef v Miehle Co., 39 NY2d 376, 385-386; Biss v Tenneco, Inc., 64 AD2d 204, 206). Plaintiff has submitted expert evidence that, based upon customs and standards in the toy safety community, the part was defective because detachable from the doll and that throwing it was foreseeable because of the extensive television exposure in which Voltron did so. This was sufficient response to defendant’s motion for summary judgment to establish questions for the jury of whether the product was defective and reasonably safe for its intended use or a reasonably foreseeable unintended use.
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed, etc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.