Legal Opinion

Seely v. White Motor Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided June 23, 1965No. L. A. 27618PublishedCited by 659 opinions

Baker, Palmer & Wall and Oran W. Palmer for Defendant and Appellant.

1Opinion of the CourtTraynor, C. J.

In October 1959 plaintiff entered into a conditional sales contract with Southern Truck Sales for the purchase of a truck manufactured by defendant, White Motor Company. Plaintiff purchased the truck for use in his business of heavy-duty hauling. Upon taking possession of the truck, plaintiff found that it bounced violently, an action known as “galloping.” For 11 months after the purchase, Southern, with guidance from White’s representatives, made many unsuccessful attempts to correct the galloping. On July 22, 1960, when slowing down for a turn, plaintiff found that the brakes did not work.…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
  4. Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1964

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

3Cited by659 opinions

  1. East River Steamship Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Board of Education v. A, C and S, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Robinson Helicopter Co., Inc. v. Dana Corp.California Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Ray v. Alad Corp.California Supreme Court · 1977

654 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