Collins v. Uniroyal, Inc.
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cueiam.
We affirm essentially for the reasons stated in the opinion of the Appellate Division, 126 N. J. Super. 401 (1973). However, we add the following to address the concept of our dissenting colleague that the adverse verdict on the strict liability count implies there was no defect in the tire and that where a tire is without defect it is not prima facie unconscionable for the manufacturer to limit his damages for breach of express warranty against a blowout to a replacement of the tire even where personal injuries or death ensue as a result of the breach.
1. The dissent does not…
2Cited by40 opinions
- Marcus v. BMW of North America, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2012
- Huddell v. LevinCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Brenner v. Little Red School House, Ltd.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- Tirrell v. Navistar Intern., Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1991
- Shelton v. Restaurant.com, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2013
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.