Casetta

Casetta v. United States Rubber Co.

Good Law
1968 Cal. App. LEXIS 1919·260 Cal. App. 2d 792·67 Cal. Rptr. 645
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 8, 1968Civ. 24119California10,110 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

—Plaintiff, a tire repairman, who was injured as a result of an explosion which occurred while he was mounting a new automobile tire on a rim, has appealed from a judgment in favor of the manufacturer and the distributor of the tire, entered following the granting of their motion for judgment notwithstanding a verdict which had awarded plaintiff SSS.SOO.

The issues as framed by the pretrial order were negligence of the defendants or either of them, contributory negligence of the plaintiff, breach of warranty by either defendant, proximate cause, and the injury and damages to the plaintiff. At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s ease, in connection with argument on a motion for nonsuit, it was recognized that the plaintiff had three theories: “one is the negligence of the manufacturer in the sale and distribution of the tire proximately resulting in injury and damage to this plaintiff . . . and the second, the breach of implied warranty of the tire and fitness . . . and the third one is strict liability in tort.” When the defendants moved for a directed verdict after all the evidence was in, the plaintiff advanced the additional theory that the defendants were negligent in not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.