Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Wawak v. Stewart

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 2, 1970No. 5-5016Published

1ConcurrenceJohn A. Fogleman, Justice

In its approach to adoption of the modern rule, the majority has overlooked one important step in establishing a liability for breach of an implied warranty. The first step toward the application of the rule adopted is the necessity for evidence establishing a breach. The burden is on one asserting such a breach to prove it. Hydrotex Industries v. Sharp, 212 Ark. 886, 208 S. W. 2d 183; Highsmith Brothers v. Hammonds, 99, Ark. 400, 138 S. W. 635; American Standard Jewelry Co. v. R. J. Hill & Son, 90 Ark. 78, 117 S. W. 781; Elmore v. Booth, 83 Ark. 47, 102 S. W. 393.

The rules regarding this…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Schipper v. Levitt & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
  3. Parish v. PittsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1968
  4. Bethlahmy v. BechtelIdaho Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Jakubowski v. Minnesota Mining and ManufacturingSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964

9 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