Curtiss v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtGreen, J.
Since our opinion in Curtiss v. YMCA, 7 Wn. App. 98, 498 P.2d 330 (1972), Premier has filed a petition for rehearing. This petition points out a possible inconsistency between the language in our opinion in the instant case 'and some of the language contained in Simmons v. Koeteeuw, 5 Wn. App. 572, 489 P.2d 364 (1971). Consequently, we deem it necessary to clarify this apparent inconsistency.
In Simmons we quoted from Justice Neill’s concurring opinion in Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wn.2d 522, 535, 452 P.2d 729 (1969) advocating that under the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A (1965) a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1969
- Pulley v. Pacific Coca-Cola Bottling Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1966
- Simmons v. KoeteeuwCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1971
- Curtiss v. Young Men's Christian Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1972
3Cited by3 opinions
- Prutch v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1980
- Dixon v. Fiat-Roosevelt Motors, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1973
- Curtiss v. Young Men's Christian Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1972