Court Opinion

ID: 9702463
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 23:12:22.908035+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:37.715958
License: Public Domain

Beasley, P. J.
(concurring in part; dissenting in part). I concur with the majority in affirming the granting of a directed verdict in favor of defendant Chrysler Corporation, but must respectfully dissent from that part of the majority’s decision which reverses the directed verdict for defendant Harvey Goldman & Company.
The common law implied warranty basis upon *539which the majority predicate liability was not pleaded nor was any amendment to the pleadings ever sought asserting such a claim. I would not agree that the case was tried by consent on an issue of what implied warranties defendant Goldman owed plaintiff in 1955. Therefore, I reject the proposition that plaintiff made a prima facie case against defendant Goldman. I would affirm the granting of a directed verdict in favor of defendant Goldman.