ATLANTIC DISTRIBUTORS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ALSON MANUFACTURING CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court affirmed a lower court's judgment, holding that the plaintiff established a prima facie case for breach of implied warranty in the sale of personal property. The court also found no error in the trial court's evidentiary rulings due to the lack of a proffer.
Yes, the plaintiff established a prima facie case for breach of implied warranty. No, the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings because the defendant failed to make a proffer of the excluded evidence.
“An implied warranty of fitness for which an article is purchased arises as a matter of law where a buyer makes known to the seller the purpose for which he buys an article and relies upon the seller's skill and judgment.”
Establishes the legal standard for an implied warranty of fitness.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAtlantic Distributors, Inc. (defendant) appealed a final judgment entered after a nonjury trial. The plaintiff, Alson Manufacturing Co., Inc., recover…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Implied Warranty Of Fitness For A Particular Purpose cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant appeals a final judgment entered pursuant to a nonjury trial. The plaintiff recovered upon an implied warranty in the sale of personal property. Two points are argued. The first urges that a prima facie case showing the existence or breach of an implied warranty was not made by the evidence. An implied warranty of fitness for which an article is purchased arises as a matter of law where a buyer makes known to the seller the purpose for which he buys an article and relies upon the seller’s skill and judgment. Berger v. E. Berger & Co., 76 Fla. 503, 80 So. 296; Smith v. Burdine’s Inc., 144 Fla. 500, 198 So. 223, 131 A.L.R. 115. We have examined the evidence presented and determine that all of the essential elements of such a warranty, and a breach thereof, appear. The weight of the evidence is not for this court to determine. Goldfarb v. Robertson, Fla. 1955, 82 So.2d 504.
Appellant’s second point urges error upon objection sustained to certain questions on cross-examination. Since no proffer was made to the trial judge, we must hold that the rulings were not error. Ritter’s Hotel, Inc. v. Sidebotham, 142 Fla. 171, 194 So. 322; Musachia v. Terry, Fla.App.1962, Case No. 61-353, 140 So.2d 605, opinion not yet reported.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lowery v. State, 402 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…ny proffer of what the excluded testimony would have been and, therefore, this point has not been properly preserved for appellate review. Ritter’s Hotel v. Sidebothom, 142 Fla. 171, 194 So. 322 (1940); Atlantic Distributors, Inc. v. Alson Mfg. Co., 141 So. 2d 305 (Fla.3d DCA 1962). Second, Lowery contends that the trial court erred in allowing testimony to be introduced regarding Lowery’s failure to appear for the taking of his handwriting samples. During the course of discovery, the state had moved for the…
-
Brown v. Hall, 221 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)…ying upon the seller’s skill and judgment, an implied warranty of fitness for which the article is purchased arises as a matter of law. Wagner v. Mars, Inc., Fla.App.1964, 166 So. 2d 673. Atlantic Distributors, Inc. v. Alson Mfg. Co., Fla.App. 1962, 141 So. 2d 305. And the basis of liability on a breach of implied warranty of fitness is the agreement, imposed by law, to be responsible in the event the thing sold is not in fact fit for the use and purposes intended. Arcade Steam Laundry v. Bass, Fla.App.1964,…
-
Llanos v. State, 401 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…therefore, it has not been preserved for appellate review.1 Ritter’s [*849] Hotel v. Sidebothom, 142 Fla. 171, 194 So. 322 (1940); Atlantic Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Shouse, 83 Fla. 156, 91 So. 90 (1922); Atlantic Distributors, Inc. v. Alson Mfg. Co., 141 So. 2d 305 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962); 3 Fla.Jur.2d Appellate Review § 93 (1978). As for Llanos’ second issue, we agree that Llanos committed only one offense and he should have been convicted of only one charge. The jury found him guilty of two counts of aggravated…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Smith v. Smith, 144 Fla. 500 (Fla. 1940)
- Berger v. E. Berger & Co., 76 Fla. 503 (Fla. 1918)
- Goldfarb v. Robertson, 82 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 1955)
- Ritter's Hotel, Inc. v. Sidebothom, 142 Fla. 171 (Fla. 1940)
- Musachia v. Terry, 140 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)