Skip to main content
· 3/13/1912

Pullman Co. v. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railroad

Citations

  • 147 Ky. 498
  • 144 S.W. 385
  • 1912 Ky. LEXIS 280

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • declining to dismiss FDUTPA claim against vehicle manufacturer defendant on primary jurisdiction grounds after noting \heavy presumption against invoking primary jurisdiction\
  • considering the “Warranty Guide” because it is central to the plaintiff’s breach of express warranty claim
  • recognizing third-party beneficiary exception under Florida law
  • recognizing third-party beneficiary exception under Florida law
  • “Plaintiff can pursue a claim of breach of implied warranty through third-party beneficiary law.’’
  • acknowledging the third-party beneficiary exception under Florida law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Chiep, Hobson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.