Legal Opinion
Central Alarm of Tucson v. Ganem
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided May 3, 1977No. 2 CA-CIV 2352PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RICHMOND, Judge.
On April 6, 1971, appellee entered into a written agreement with appellant, Central Alarm of Tucson, providing for the installation and maintenance of a burglar alarm system at appellee’s place of business. The system was in part ultrasonic in that it was designed to be activated by air waves caused by movement in the protected area. When such movement was sensed, a signal would be transmitted to appellant’s headquarters, and it was agreed that Central Alarm then would notify the police and dispatch its own agents to the alarm site. Appellant’s manager testified that…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Massengill v. Yuma CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1969
- Better Food Markets, Inc. v. American District Telegraph Co.California Supreme Court · 1953
- Nichols v. City of PhoenixArizona Supreme Court · 1949
- Nicholas v. Miami Burglar Alarm Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1976
- Foont-Freedenfeld Corp. v. Electro-Protective Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1973
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of America, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1990
- Rollins, Inc. v. HellerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
- Rossell v. Volkswagen of AmericaArizona Supreme Court · 1985
- Lobianco v. Property Protection, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Fretwell v. Protection Alarm Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.