Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ebbert v. Philadelphia Electric Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 10, 1937No. Appeals, 259 and 260Published

1Dissent

Dissenting opinion by

Mr. Justice Drew:

What duty, if any, is imposed by law on vendors to inspect goods they sell? If I read the opinion of the majority correctly, it imposes the duty of inspection upon vendors of all articles not sold in sealed packages, wherever a defect would make the article sold dangerous for use. I think this holding goes far beyond the warrant of any satisfactory authority anywhere. As a general rule the vendor of an article manufactured by another has no obligation other than that in contract, expressly undertaken or implied by law. There are, of course, exceptions.…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Guinan v. Famous Players-Lasky Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  3. Johnson v. Cadillac Motor Car Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
  4. King Hardware Co. v. EnnisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
  5. Kalash v. Los Angeles Ladder Co.California Supreme Court · 1934

20 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