Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc., 399 P.2d 681.

40 citing documents.

Winsor v. Glasswerks PHX, L.L.C. 63 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Winsor v. Glasswerks PHX, L.L.C. 63 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
this court adopted the modern legal concept of the manufacturer’s strict liability and tort with regard to its manufactured products.”) ( , ) (Lockwood J., concurring).
Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. 786 P.2d 939 Ariz. 1990
Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. 786 P.2d 939 Ariz. 1990
at 38 , 467 P.2d at 262 ; Nalban-dian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc., , (Lockwood, J., concurring).
Bryant v. Continental Conveyor & Equipment Co. 751 P.2d 509 Ariz. 1988
Bryant v. Continental Conveyor & Equipment Co. 751 P.2d 509 Ariz. 1988
Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc.
Tucson Industries, Incorporated v. Schwartz 501 P.2d 936 Ariz. 1972
Tucson Industries, Incorporated v. Schwartz 501 P.2d 936 Ariz. 1972
-119 , Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc., -288
Downs v. Shouse 501 P.2d 401 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Downs v. Shouse 501 P.2d 401 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc.
Slonsky v. Phoenix Coca-Cola Bottling Company 499 P.2d 741 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Slonsky v. Phoenix Coca-Cola Bottling Company 499 P.2d 741 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
See the concurring opinion in Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc.
Lechuga, Inc. v. Montgomery 467 P.2d 256 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Caruth v. Mariani 463 P.2d 83 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Caruth v. Mariani 463 P.2d 83 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
bility has been based upon the existence of a defective product which caused injury to a human being, and in both Greenman and Vandermark we did not limit the rules stated to consumers and users but instead used language applicable to human beings generally.” Neither do we think it an accident or oversight when Justice Lockwood in her concurring opinion in Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc., , stated: “In the Colvin case, supra, we adopted Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. * * *» The re
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
Rexall Drug Co. v. Nihill, 9 Cir., 276 F.2d 637 , 79 A.L.R.2d 419 (1960); 7 Arizona Law Review 263 (1966); Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc., , Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc., 59 Cal.2d 57 , *429 27 Cal.Rptr.
OS Stapley Company v. Miller 447 P.2d 248 Ariz. 1968
OS Stapley Company v. Miller 447 P.2d 248 Ariz. 1968
In the recent case of Shannon v. Butler Homes, Inc. , we stated: “The liability of a manufacturer of an article is in tort ( , , , ), and it is not assumed by agreement but imposed by law.
Balon v. Hotel & Restaurant Supplies, Inc. 445 P.2d 833 Ariz. 1968
Balon v. Hotel & Restaurant Supplies, Inc. 445 P.2d 833 Ariz. 1968
Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc., , , *478
Otis Elevator Company v. Valley National Bank 447 P.2d 879 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 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
Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc.
OS Stapley Company v. Miller 430 P.2d 701 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
OS Stapley Company v. Miller 430 P.2d 701 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
ne Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of Arizona has indicated in a concurring opinion that Arizona follows this doctrine: “ , this Court adopted the modern legal concept of a manufacturer’s strict liability in tort with regard to its manufactured products.” Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc.
Bailey v. Montgomery Ward and Company 431 P.2d 108 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Bailey v. Montgomery Ward and Company 431 P.2d 108 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
The liability of a manufacturer of an article is in tort ( , , , ), and it is not assumed by agreement but imposed by law.
Shannon v. Butler Homes, Inc. 428 P.2d 990 Ariz. 1967
Shannon v. Butler Homes, Inc. 428 P.2d 990 Ariz. 1967
The liability of a manufacturer of an article is in tort ( , , and concurring opinion of Justice Lockwood in Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, § P.2d 681 ), and it is not assumed by agreement but imposed by law.
Harmon v. Hanson's Pump & MacHine Works, Inc. 417 P.2d 741 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Harmon v. Hanson's Pump & MacHine Works, Inc. 417 P.2d 741 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Defendant cites Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc., , for the proposition that where there is an expressed warranty a defendant merely need show that the warranted equipment failed during the warranty period.
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Davis 413 P.2d 590 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Davis 413 P.2d 590 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc., , , , 386 P.2d.23 (1963); , Sampson v. Transport Indemnity Co., 1 Ariz.App.
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.
Meyer v. Ricklick 409 P.2d 280 Ariz. 1965
Meyer v. Ricklick 409 P.2d 280 Ariz. 1965
(Emphasis added) See also, Nalbandian v. Bryan Jackson Pumps, Inc., , , , .
First National Bank of Arizona v. Otis Elevator Co. 406 P.2d 430 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
First National Bank of Arizona v. Otis Elevator Co. 406 P.2d 430 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Our Supreme Court recently considered a case of statutory implied warranty in Nalbandian v. Byron Jackson Pumps, Inc.