Segal v. Carroll Furniture Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.
1. Although it is the rule that where a retail dealer buys from a manufacturer for resale an article in common use and of ordi■narily safe nature, contained in a sealed or closed package, he is under no duty to test or inspect the article, and can not be held liable for an injury to a purchaser from a latent or concealed defect, or even from a defect which would have been patent if the package had been opened, in the absence of actual knowledge of the defect, yet where the article has been exposed by the dealer in the process of sale and has been installed by him for the purchaser, with an…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Fulton Ice & Coal Co. v. PeceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- King Hardware Co. v. EnnisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
- Lewis v. TerryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Woodward v. MillerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Fleetwood v. Swift & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Seagraves v. ABCO Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
- Ward v. NanceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
- McGee v. BennettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1945
- David Allen Purkey, by Next Friend, D. A. Purkey v. Sears, Roebuck & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
- Miszczak v. Maytag Chicago Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1956
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.