Legal Opinion
Estabrook v. Webber Motor Co.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided July 27, 1940PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtManser, J.
These two cases have previously been considered as to the sufficiency of the declarations in the plaintiffs’ writs. Special demurrers were filed and sustained and this court overruled exceptions. 136 Me., 233; 7 A., 2d, 894. The plaintiffs then offered amendments, identical in language, so the two do not need separate consideration. Upon objections the amendments were disallowed, and the cases again come forward on exceptions.
The actions are for injuries sustained as a result of alleged latent defects in an automobile sold to Curtis G. Estabrook, one of the plaintiffs, which automobile some…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Johnson v. Cadillac Motor Car Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
- Hudgins v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Olds Motor Works v. ShafferCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
- Chaisson v. WilliamsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1931
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Cushman v. PerkinsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1968
- Allstate Insurance Co. v. LyonsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
- Reynolds v. W. H. Hinman Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1950
- People's Savings Bank v. ChesleySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1942
- A. E. Borden Co. v. WurmSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1966
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.