Greiner Motor Co. v. Sumpter
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
George Rose Smith, Justice.
On September 1, 1966, K. S. Sumpter and his wife, the appellees, bought a supposedly new Pontiac Tempest car from the appellant. A number of repairs to the motor and transmission soon became necessary. Eventually the Sumpters learned that the car had not been a brand-new vehicle when they bought it. They elected to keep the car and bring .this action for damages resulting from the seller’s misrepresentations. This appeal is from a verdict and judgment awarding the plaintiffs $1,497 in damages.
Greiner contends primarily that it was entitled to a directed verdict,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Union Motors, Inc. v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1967
- Union Motor Co. v. TurbivilleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1954
3Cited by10 opinions
- Ray Dodge, Inc. v. MooreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
- Wallis v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2005
- O'Neal Ford, Inc. v. DavieSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
- Cockrum v. PattilloSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1969
- Bull Motor Co. v. MurphyCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2007
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.