Daughtry v. Jet Aeration Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1Dissent
*712Rosellini, J.
(dissenting) — There is no reason to remand this case, involving a claim for less than $1,000 for additional findings, and the incurring of additional attorney fees. It is plain that the statute of limitations has not run, whether the 3- or 4-year statute applies. With respect to breaches of warranties in sales, RCW 62A.2-725 makes the statute run from the time of discovery of the breach, where a warranty explicitly extends to future performance of the goods, and that is precisely the situation here. The majority acknowledges that the malfunctioning did not begin before 1971.…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Seely v. White Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1965
- Santor v. a & M KARAGHEUSIAN, INC.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
- Randy Knitwear, Inc. v. American Cyanamid Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1962
- Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1969
- Terhune v. A. H. Robins Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1978
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.