Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Davidson v. Wee, 379 P.2d 744.

31 citing documents.

Garcia v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 685 P.2d 1336 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Garcia v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 685 P.2d 1336 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Pace v. Sagebrush Sales Co. 560 P.2d 789 Ariz. 1977
Pace v. Sagebrush Sales Co. 560 P.2d 789 Ariz. 1977
255 , , we agree with the defendant that the requirement of notice may indeed be fulfilled by the pleadings themselves.
Arnold v. Frigid Food Express Co. 453 P.2d 983 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
Arnold v. Frigid Food Express Co. 453 P.2d 983 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
Worthington v. Funk, 7 Ariz.App.
Eck v. Helene Curtis Industries, Inc. 453 P.2d 366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Eck v. Helene Curtis Industries, Inc. 453 P.2d 366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Even though implied warranty of merchantability and implied warranty of fitness are two different theories and in proper situations the court could instruct on both, , the privity requirement as to both theories applies in Arizona.'
Essex Wire Corp. of California v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District 451 P.2d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Essex Wire Corp. of California v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District 451 P.2d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Madden v. Barnes 446 P.2d 510 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Madden v. Barnes 446 P.2d 510 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Tucson Utility Supplies, Inc. v. Gallagher 433 P.2d 629 Ariz. 1967
Tucson Utility Supplies, Inc. v. Gallagher 433 P.2d 629 Ariz. 1967
We have held that the giving of notice of a breach of warranty within a reasonable time after the buyer knows or should have known of the breach is a prerequisite to the right of recovery, , but we fail to see in the instant case how the jury was improperly charged on this point.
Bailey v. Montgomery Ward and Company 431 P.2d 108 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Davidson v. Wee 424 P.2d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Davidson v. Wee 424 P.2d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
State v. Valenzuela 418 P.2d 386 Ariz. 1966
State v. Valenzuela 418 P.2d 386 Ariz. 1966
Southern Pacific Company v. Barnes 415 P.2d 579 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Southern Pacific Company v. Barnes 415 P.2d 579 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Cf., , holding that the filing of a complaint can serve as notice of a breach of warranty.
Gallagher v. Viking Supply Corporation 411 P.2d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Gallagher v. Viking Supply Corporation 411 P.2d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Nal- *62 bandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc.
Dowdle v. Young 401 P.2d 740 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Dowdle v. Young 401 P.2d 740 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
In the recent case of Davidson v. Wee (1963), , , our Supreme Court has made the cited cases of both appellant and appellee inapplicable to the question of notice in this case.
Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc. 399 P.2d 681 Ariz. 1965
Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc. 399 P.2d 681 Ariz. 1965
Sax v. Kopelman 396 P.2d 17 Ariz. 1964
Sax v. Kopelman 396 P.2d 17 Ariz. 1964
*398 ; Davis v. Weber, 93 Ariz 312, .
Colvin v. Superior Equipment Company 392 P.2d 778 Ariz. 1964
Colvin v. Superior Equipment Company 392 P.2d 778 Ariz. 1964

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by