Legal Opinion

Marshall v. Fenton

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 14, 1928PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.

Defendant Katz conducted a repair garage in New London and occasionally sold secondhand automobiles. He permitted defendant Fenton, as a prospective purchaser, to take and try an automobile which he had for sale. Fenton returned it reporting that some repairs were needed. Subsequently Fenton, having learned that the repairs had been made, requested of Katz’s foreman, one Wiesch, permission to take the car for the purpose of trying it again to see if it was satisfactory. Wiesch, in the absence of Katz, allowed Fenton to take the car for that purpose, and while Fenton was driving it a collision…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Geiss v. Twin City Taxicab Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  2. Wolf v. SulikSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
  3. O'Keefe v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
  4. Todd v. BradleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
  5. Adams v. Herald Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1909

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Gionfriddo v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
  2. Saums v. ParfetMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Fairbanks v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
  4. Bertrand v. Mutual Motor Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1931
  5. Farm Bureau Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Kohn Bros. Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1954

19 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