Name: Tosha Brown

QUESTIONS ABOUT
Rappaport v. International Playtex Corporation,
43 A.D.2d 393; 52 N.Y.S.2d 241; 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5728 (1974)

Please answer the questions in the space provided. Please type your answers and
email the document to me by 11:30 pm on the due date.
1

Who was Rappaport in this scenario? Rapport was the executor of Henry
Barnums estate in this scenario.

Why did Rappaport sue Playtex? Rapport sued Playtex because Playtexs
employee got into an automobile accident with deadly consequences for
Henry Barnum and it was said that Mr. Davis was working when he had the
automobile wreck.

Under what legal theory did he sue Playtex? Mr. Rappaport sued Playtex
under the legal theory of vicarious liability, and he lost.

What is Playtexs defense? Playtexs defense was that Mr. Davis wasnt
working at the time and if the dinner party with his friend would have been
canceled then he wouldnt have been driving so the accident wouldnt have
happened. Mr. Davis stated that he did his paperwork wherever he was on
Sundays. So that didnt constitute him working.

Who wins? Why? Playtex wins because it was proved that Playtex had no
liability because Mr. Davis was found not to be working on this particular
Sunday.