Page:Cardozo-Nature-Of-The-Judicial-Process.pdf/159

found in a recent decision of a federal court.^[1] The plaintiff sued a manufacturer of automobiles to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from a defective car. On the first trial he had a verdict, which the Circuit Court of Appeals for the second circuit reversed on the ground that the manufacturer owed no duty to the plaintiff, the occupant of the car, since the latter was not the original purchaser, but had bought from some one else.^[2]On a second trial, the judge, in obedience to this ruling, dismissed the complaint, and a writ of error brought the case before the same appellate court again. In the meantime, the New York Court of Appeals had held, in an action against another manufacturer, that there was a duty in such circumstances, irrespective of privity of contract.^[3] The federal court followed that decision, overruled its prior ruling, and reversed the judgment of dismissal which had been entered in compliance with its mandate. The defendant in that case who first reversed the

1. Johnson v. Cadillac Motor Co., 261 Fed. Rep. 878.
2. 221 Fed. 801
3. MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N. Y. 382.