Legal Opinion

Fentress v. Van Etta Motors

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 31, 1958No. Civ. A. 2521PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDevine, P. J.

Plaintiff has appealed from a judgment in favor of Ford Motor Company, based on an order sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend. The action is against Van Etta Motors, vendor of a Mercury automobile, on an alleged warranty; answer of that defendant has been filed; but it is also against Ford Motor Company for damages alleged to have been caused by negligence in the manufacture of the brakes and wheel bearings of the automobile. The damages were to the automobile itself, in an accident in which it was wrecked when the brakes failed to hold. No damage to person or to other property is…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Ultramares Corp. v. ToucheNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Biakanja v. IrvingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Burr v. Sherwin Williams Co.California Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Kalash v. Los Angeles Ladder Co.California Supreme Court · 1934

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Sabella v. WislerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Comstock v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Gherna v. Ford Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. Northern Power & Engineering Corp. v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1981
  5. Rocky Mountain Fire & Casualty Co. v. Biddulph OldsmobileArizona Supreme Court · 1982

15 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