Legal Opinion

Kontos v. Jordan

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 5, 1938No. 26526PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSutton, J.

1. “No implied warranty that a machine, tool, or article is suitable to accomplish a particular purpose or to do a specific work arises where the vendor orders of the manufacturer, or purchases of the dealer, a specific, described, or definite machine, tool, or article, although the vendor knows the purpose or work which the purchaser intends to accomplish with it, and assures him that it will effect it. Such an assurance is but the expression of an opinion, when it is followed by a written contract, complete in itself, which is silent upon the subject. The extent of the implied warranty in…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Davis Calyx Drill Co. v. MalloryCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
  3. Fay & Eagan Co. v. Dudley & SonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
  4. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. BroachSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
  5. Crankshaw v. Schweizer Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1907

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. The Hertz Corporation v. Donald Cox and Sarah C. CroweCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
  2. Ambrose v. BrooksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
  3. McCraw v. WatkinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1978
  4. Collins v. ABEL HOLDING COMPANYCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
  5. Kirkland v. John Deere Plow Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1941

3 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