Honeywell, Inc. v. Bel Air Corp.
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
SHORES, Justice.
This is an appeal by the defendant, Honeywell, Inc. (hereinafter “Honeywell”), from the denial of its motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or, alternatively, for a new trial.
The ease arose from the mechanical failure of an air conditioning unit owned by the plaintiff, Bel Air Corporation (hereinafter “Bel Air”). Under a service agreement with Bel Air, Honeywell maintained and serviced the unit, which is located atop the Sears, Roebuck & Company store at Bel Air Mall. The contract contained the following pertinent provisions:
“I. PLANNED PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE
“Pla…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- A. A. Spurlin, Surviving Parent of Douglas J. Spurlin, a Minor, Deceased v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
- Hanson v. CouchSupreme Court of Alabama · 1978
- Ragland v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- McLarty v. WrightCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1975
- Adams v. Travelers Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1986
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lewis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2003
- Curtis v. Faulkner UniversitySupreme Court of Alabama · 1991