Legal Opinion

Hill v. Matthews Paint Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 3, 1957No. Civ. 21810PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.

By the instant action, plaintiff sought damages for losses sustained as the result of a fire allegedly caused by the spontaneous combustion of a spray material purchased from defendant. Trial was to the court without a jury. The court found for defendant and entered judgment accordingly. Plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiff’s complaint comprises three causes of action. Count I alleges, in substance, that defendant breached an express oral representation, promise and warranty to manufacture a spray finish material “which would be safe and in all respects fit and proper for plaintiff’s use and capable…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Puckhaber v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Bohn v. WatsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  3. Petersen v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Valdez v. Taylor Automobile Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Basin Oil Co. v. Baash-Ross Tool Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Smith v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Magee v. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1963
  3. Rexall Drug Co. v. NihillCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
  4. Montijo v. Western Greyhound LinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  5. Deckard v. SorensonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

9 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