CHRYSLER CREDIT CORPORATION, PETITIONER,

v.

RONALD W. REHUREK ET AL., RESPONDENTS

Citator

Cited By (14 total)

• Monsanto Agric. Prods. Co. v. Clinch Edenfield, 426 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
  …in this case, based primarily on the authority of Ford Motor Company v. Pittman, 227 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969), cert. denied, 237 So. 2d 177 (Fla.1970) and Rehurek v. Chrysler Credit Corporation, 262 So. 2d 452 (Fla.2d DCA 1972), cert. denied, 267 So. 2d 833 (Fla.1972). Both of these cases involved the sale of dangerous instrumentalities (automobiles) to unsophisticated consumers. In both cases the court also found that the limitation or exclusion of warranty was not conspicious. The Rehurek court found…
• United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Odoms, 444 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
  …efore it, as to which the parties have had an adequate opportunity to litigate, the court will apply res judicata or collateral estoppel to enforce repose. Jet Air Freight v. Jet Air Freight Delivery, Inc., 264 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 267 So. 2d 833 (Fla.1972). See also Carol City Utilities v. Miami Gardens Shopping Plaza, 165 So. 2d 199 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). It is generally held that a determination by a worker’s compensation tribunal that an employer/employee relationship exists, that the emplo…
• Cedars OF Lebanon Hosp. Corp. v. European X-Ray Distribs. OF Am., Inc., 444 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
  …urpose when there was only economic loss and no privity. Manheim v. Ford Motor Co., 201 So. 2d 440 (Fla.1967); Chrysler Corp. v. Miller, 310 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Rehurek v. Chrysler Credit Corp., 262 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 267 So. 2d 833 (Fla.1972). The courts in both Miller and Rehurek based their decisions on the language of sections 672.315 and 672.316, Florida Statutes; that is to say, on the language of the Uniform Commercial Code. In so doing, the court in Rehurek stated: Whe…

Authorities Cited

• Rehurek v. Chrysler Credit Corp., 262 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972)