Legal Opinion
Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Cannon
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
Decided November 9, 1982No. 1028, September Term. 1982PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilner, J.
Lowe, J., files a concurring opinion at page 119 infra.
The narrow question presented in this appeal is whether a buyer of goods may sue a person other than his immediate seller for breach of implied warranty without having given that person timely notice of the alleged defect. Restated: Does Md. Code Ann., Comm. Law art. § 2-607 (3) (a) require a buyer to give notice of a claimed breach of implied warranty to a "remote” seller — someone in the marketing chain other than the person from whom he bought the goods? The question has not previously been decided in Maryland.
The facts of the case are…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
- Santor v. a & M KARAGHEUSIAN, INC.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
- Morrow v. New Moon Homes, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1976
- Otto E. Pritchard v. Liggett & Myers Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1961
- Wights v. Staff Jennings, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1965
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Compaq Computer Corp. v. LaprayTexas Supreme Court · 2004
- In re Carrier IQ, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Cooley v. Big Horn Harvestore Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1991
- Ragland Mills, Inc. v. General Motors Corp.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1989
- Church of Nativity of Our Lord v. Watpro, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.