Dillingham v. Chevrolet Motor Co.
Decision Date | 22 December 1936 |
Docket Number | No. 5955.,5955. |
Citation | 17 F. Supp. 615 |
Parties | DILLINGHAM v. CHEVROLET MOTOR CO. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma |
Taylor, Muse & Taylor, of Wichita Falls, Tex., and Roe & Roe, of Frederick, Okl., for plaintiff.
Abernathy & Howell, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendant.
C. H. Dillingham, the husband of the plaintiff, on or about the 13th day of August, 1933, purchased a Chevrolet automobile from Murrell Brothers Motor Company, Frederick, Okl., who were regular dealers for said cars. The car, according to the petition of the plaintiff, was used by the said Dillingham and by his wife, the plaintiff in this action, continuously from the date of its purchase until the 20th day of May, 1934, at which time the plaintiff was driving said car to Oklahoma City.
The petition alleges:
The petition further alleges:
The petition further, in specifically enumerating the defects in said brakes, states:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ulwelling v. Crown Coach Corp.
...1952, this alone is not sufficient to justify a finding of negligence for a failure to utilize an alternative method. (Dillingham v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 17 F.Supp. 615; Redfoot v. J. T. Jenkens Co., 138 Cal.App.2d 108, 291 P.2d The evidence shows that a warning system consisting of a buzze......
-
Hanna v. Fletcher
...Co. v. Wolber, 32 F.2d 18 (7 Cir. 1929), certiorari denied 280 U.S. 565, 50 S.Ct. 25, 74 L. Ed. 619 (1929); Dillingham v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 17 F.Supp. 615 (D.C. W.D.Okl.1936); Auld v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 261 App.Div. 918, 25 N.Y.S.2d 491 (1941), affirmed 288 N.Y. 515, 41 N. E.2d 927 (19......
-
Washburn Storage Co. v. General Motors Corp.
...to control the decision here. Our attention is called to Amason v. Ford Motor Co., 5 Cir., 1936, 80 F.2d 265; Dillingham v. Chevrolet Motor Co., D.C., 17 F.Supp. 615. It is our opinion that a manufacturer, who sells articles knowing that such articles are liable to be resold or used by othe......
-
Beadles v. Servel Inc.
...of law that it is of proper design and construction. In support of its contention defendant cites several cases. Dillingham v. Chevrolet Motor Co., D.C., 17 F.Supp. 615; Lynch v. International Harvester Co., 10 Cir., 60 F.2d 223; Osheroff v. Rhodes-Burford Co., 203 Ky. 408, 262 S.W. 583; an......