Terry v. Double Cola Bottling Company
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtHiggiNS, J.
The plaintiff in this action seeks to recover for that: (1) The defendant bottled and sold the drink containing the deleterious substance, knowing that it would be resold for human consumption; (2) the bottler’s implied warranty of fitness extended to the ultimate consumer because of the knowledge that the contents of the bottle would be resold in the condition in which it left the bottler’s plant. The plaintiff cites as authority the decision in Ward v. Sea Food Co., 171 N.C. 33, 87 S.E. 958 (a negligence, not a warranty case); the dissenting opinion in Thomason v. Ballard & Ballard Co., 208…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Wyatt v. North Carolina Equipment CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
- Enloe v. Charlotte Coca-Cola Bottling Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
- Ward v. Morehead City Sea Food Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Davis v. RadfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Thomason v. Ballard & Ballard Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- State v. SilhanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- Kelly v. Georgia-Pacific LLCDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2009
- Corprew v. Geigy Chemical CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Goodman v. Wenco Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
- Mary Kate Brendle, Administratrix of the Estate of William Charles Brendle, Deceased v. The General Tire and Rubber CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1974
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.