Legal Opinion

Coakley v. Ford Motor Company

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 14, 1971No. 7121SC279PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BROCK, Judge.

The only exceptions which are preserved on appeal are to the entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant Shugart as to the cause of action grounded on negligence, and the allowance of the motion of defendant Ford for directed verdict in the cause of action grounded on negligence. Thus, we are not presented with any question relating to any alleged breach of warranty.

Summary Judgment for Shugart:

In Veach v. American Corp., 266 N.C. 542, 146 S.E. 2d 793, the Court said:

“As to the seller of a chattel known to have been manufactured by another, the rule has been stated as…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Mills v. MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  2. Mills v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  3. Gwyn v. Lucky City Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  4. Haithcock v. Chimney Rock CompanyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
  5. Harward v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Cockerham v. WardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Millsaps v. WILKES CONTRACTING COMPANYCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
  3. Gaito v. AumanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  4. Griffis v. LazarovichCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
  5. Isaacson v. Toyota Motor Sales, U. S. A., Inc.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1976

11 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