Legal Opinion

Mieske v. Bartell Drug Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 19, 1979No. 45324PublishedCited by 52 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrachtenbach, J.

This case determines the measure of damages for personal property, developed movie film, which is destroyed, and which cannot be replaced or reproduced. It also decides the legal effect of a clause which purports to limit the responsibility of a film processor to replacement of film.

We will detail the facts later, but the heart of the matter is that plaintiffs delivered already developed movie film to a retail store for the sole purpose of having the film spliced onto larger reels. The film was lost or destroyed by the retailer's processing agent. A jury verdict of $7,500 was returned against…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Schroeder v. Fageol Motors, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Wille v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1976
  3. Baker v. CITY SEATTLEWashington Supreme Court · 1971
  4. McCurdy v. Union Pacific RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Walter E. Heller & Co. v. Convalescent Home of First Church of DeliveranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1977

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

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. Petersen v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Collins v. Click Camera & Video, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. United States v. Itt Rayonier, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
  4. Zuver v. Airtouch Communications, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Zuver v. Airtouch Communications, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2004

47 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