Stokes v. Gary Barbera Enterprises, Inc.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
HESTER, Judge:
¶ 1 Gary Barbera Enterprises, Inc. appeals the verdict entered by the court in this nonjury case. We affirm.
¶ 2 Thomas and Joan Stokes, Appellees, instituted this action against Appellant and Chrysler Corporation alleging that Appellant sold them a vehicle that it represented as new but actually was used. Appellees settled with Chrysler Corporation, and the matter proceeded to nonjury trial. The trial court concluded that Appellant had misrepresented to Appellees that they were purchasing a new car when, in fact, the car that they purchased was used. It assessed damages and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Johnson v. Hyundai Motor AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Hammer v. NikolCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Neff v. General Motors Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
- Lou Botti Construction v. HarbulakSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Hester v. Pennsylvania Financial Responsibility Assigned Claims ACPSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
3Cited by24 opinions
- Shamell Samuel-Bassett, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Kia Motors America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2004
- Bennett v. A.T. Masterpiece Homes at Broadsprings, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Neal v. Bavarian Motors, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- True Railroad Associates, L.P. v. Ames True Temper, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Makozy v. MakozySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.