Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., 101 So. 871.

73 citing documents.

George L. Bruce v. Ford Motor Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
3 “A buyer of an automobile who asserts a redhibition claim need not show the particular cause of the defects making the vehicle unfit for the intended purposes, but rather must simply prove the actual existence of such defects.” Young v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., So.
Bruce v. Ford Motor Co. 130 So. 3d 427 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
|4“A buyer of an automobile who asserts a redhibition claim need not show the particular cause of the defects making the vehicle unfit for the intended purposes, but rather must simply prove the actual existence of such defects.” Young v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., , 101 So.
Huey D. Bonnette, Et Ux. v. Ford Motor Company La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
“A buyer of an automobile who asserts a redhibition claim need not show the particular cause of the defects making the vehicle unfit for the intended purposes, but rather must simply prove the actual existence of such defects.” Young v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., So.
Bonnette v. Ford Motor Co. 88 So. 3d 1164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
“A buyer of an automobile who asserts a redhibition claim need not show the particular cause of the defects making the vehicle unfit for the intended purposes, but rather must simply prove the actual existence of such defects.” Young v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., , 101 So.
Bruce A. Baker v. Mazda Motor of America La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Baker v. Mazda Motor of America 856 So. 2d 118 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
Morgan v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc. 640 So. 2d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
Young v. Ford Motor Co., Inc., , 101 So.
Young v. Ford Motor Co., Inc. 595 So. 2d 1123 La. 1992
Chance v. Stevens of Leesville, Inc. 491 So. 2d 116 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Dumond v. Houma Toyota, Inc.-AMC Jeep, Inc. 470 So. 2d 484 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Moses v. Ed's Manufactured Housing, Inc. 470 So. 2d 935 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Credeur v. Moss Motors 460 So. 2d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
when the thing is a complicated piece of machinery.” Commercial Union Insurance Co. v. Ryland Dodge & Chrysler, Inc., supra, quoting Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Company, Ltd., , 101 So.
First Homestead Federal Savings v. Dent 459 So. 2d 689 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Moreno 's Inc. v. Lake Charles Catholic High Schools, Inc.
Commercial Union Ins. v. Ryland Dodge & Chrysler, Inc. 457 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
It is stated in Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Company, Ltd., , 101 So.
Dickerson v. Begnaud Motors, Inc. 446 So. 2d 536 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Jordan v. Security Co. 425 So. 2d 333 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
Anselmo v. Chrysler Corporation 414 So. 2d 872 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbot Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Lokey v. Dixie Buick, Inc. 400 So. 2d 322 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Lee v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of US 391 So. 2d 37 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1981
Dixon Enterprises, Inc. v. Restaurant Products, Inc. 389 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
John Deere Indus. Equip. Co. v. Willett Timber Co. 380 So. 2d 182 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Clinkscales v. Superior Pontiac-GMC, Inc. 365 So. 2d 895 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
[2] Moreno's, Inc. v. Lake Charles Catholic H. Schs., Inc., La., ; , 101 So.
Alexander v. Burroughs Corporation 350 So. 2d 988 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
Edelman Systems, Inc. v. Capitol GMC, Inc. 345 So. 2d 99 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Moreno's, Inc. v. LAKE CHARLES CATHOLIC HIGH SCHS., INC. 315 So. 2d 660 La. 1975
Ticheli v. Silmon 304 So. 2d 792 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1974
2d 693 (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Rey v. Cuccia 298 So. 2d 840 La. 1974
655 , (1949); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Prince v. Paretti Pontiac Company, Inc. 281 So. 2d 112 La. 1973
478 (1929); Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Vervik v. State ex rel. Department of Highways 278 So. 2d 530 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Lee v. Blanchard 264 So. 2d 364 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
Peters v. Pattison Pontiac Co. 259 So. 2d 99 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1972
Richardson v. French 253 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1971
Mid City Finance Co. v. Coleman 232 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
As in Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Company, Ltd., , 101 So.
Gauche v. Ford Motor Company 226 So. 2d 198 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1969
Minot Hooper Co. v. Crowley Industrial Bag Co. 217 So. 2d 653 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
Stumpf v. Metairie Motor Sales, Inc. 212 So. 2d 705 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1968
Fisher v. City Sales and Service, supra [La.App., ]; Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., supra [ , 101 So.
Ditta v. Polk Chevrolet, Inc. 196 So. 2d 672 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
John E. Hunt Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Montaldo 173 So. 2d 40 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
Hanna Investments, Inc. v. Stovall 171 So. 2d 678 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1965
Glenn v. Caire 164 So. 2d 656 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
Gaspard v. LeMaire 158 So. 2d 149 La. 1963
Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
Stevens v. Daigle and Hinson Rambler, Inc. 153 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Not only is there insufficient evidence of any such express waiver by the buyer, and even assuming that the language of the guarantee was sufficient to relieve the manufacturer itself of its implied warranty of fitness under Louisiana law ( , 101 So.
Harris v. Automatic Enterprises of Louisiana, Inc. 145 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1962
Fisher v. City Sales and Service, supra; , 101 So.
Goff v. Dewey Olivier, Inc. 137 So. 2d 393 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
A line of cases beginning with Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd. (1924), , 101 So.
Fisher v. City Sales and Service 128 So. 2d 790 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
Likewise, "`It is not incumbent upon the buyer * * * to seek out, allege, and prove the particular and underlying cause of the defects which make the thing sold unfit for the purpose intended; particularly when that thing is a complicated piece of machinery; it is sufficient *793 if he alleged and afterwards proves as a fact such defects exist,'" , 101 So.
Route v. Smith Chevrolet Co. 128 So. 2d 58 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
279 ; Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Co., Ltd., , 101 So.
AA Gilbert Pipe & Supply Company v. Cassard 121 So. 2d 736 La. 1960
Combs v. International Harvester Company 115 So. 2d 641 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1959
2520, 2529; Crawford v. Abbott Automobile Company, 1924, , 101 So.
Falk v. Luke Motor Company, Inc. 112 So. 2d 683 La. 1959
Bartolotta v. Gambino 78 So. 2d 208 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955