Legal Opinion

Gardner v. Downtown Porsche Audi

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 2, 1986No. B008999PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

This case raises an issue common in daily life yet one which has received almost no attention in California appellate decisions. May an automobile repair garage avoid liability for its negligence by having car owners sign a waiver form when they leave their cars with the garage? In this opinion, we hold they cannot and affirm the judgment below.

Facts and Proceedings Below

In late June 1978, respondent Bruce Gardner (Gardner) took his 1976 Porsche 911 automobile to be repaired at appellant Downtown Porsche Audi (Downtown). The record on appeal suggests Gardner signed a form…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Tunkl v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. George v. Bekins Van & Storage Co.California Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Henrioulle v. Marin Ventures, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Perera v. Panama-Pacific International Exp. Co.California Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Barkett v. BrucatoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. City of Santa Barbara v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Blankenheim v. E. F. Hutton & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1990
  3. Westlye v. Look Sports, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1993
  4. Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. Vaughan-Jacklin Seed Co.California Court of Appeal · 1988
  5. Randas v. YMCA of Metropolitan Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API