Washington State Elec. Contractors Ass'n, Inc., a Washington Corp. v. Frank Forrest, 880 F.2d 247 (9th Cir. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
Washington State Elec. Contractors Ass'n, Inc., a Washington Corp. v. Frank Forrest, 880 F.2d 247 (9th Cir. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Genesis Health Clubs, Inc. v. Led Solar & Light Co. (ca10, 2016-02-01)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Genesis Health Clubs, Inc. v. Led Solar & Light Co.
10th Cir. · 2016 · confidence medium
Supply Co. v. Metal-Prep of Houston, Inc., 912 F.2d 252, 257 (8th Cir.1990) (buyer must unequivocally and timely revoke and “not indulge in any action which would indicate that he has reaccepted the goods”); cf. Newmaster v. Southeast Equipment, Inc., 231 Kan. 466 , 646 P.2d 488, 492 (1982) (when the buyer had provided the seller a reasonable time to effect repairs and then returned the defective item, the buyer had “justifiably revoked acceptance and was therefore entitled to recover the purchase price”); Triad Systems Corp. v. Alsip, 880 F.2d 247, 249 (10th Cir.1989) (buyer had delay…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Eggl v. Letvin Equipment Co.
N.D. · 2001 · confidence medium
“Whether a party’s revocation of acceptance is effective in any given case is dependent upon the facts and circumstances surrounding the revocation, *442 and is normally a question for the trier of fact.” Triad Systems Corp. v. Alsip, 880 F.2d 247, 249 (10th Cir.1989).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Novacore Technologies, Inc. v. GST Communications Corp.
D. Mass. · 1998 · confidence medium
Lighting, Inc., 37 F.3d at 1258-59 (holding that buyer was entitled to revoke its acceptance of seller’s headlight aiming system approximately two years after purchase even though buyer knew system was unable to perform required tests at the time of purchase, where seller’s assurances that the system could be modified induced buyer to continue working with seller to upgrade the system and buyer reasonably deferred to seller’s superior expertise with the system’s technology until promised software upgrades failed to make system viable); Triad Systems Corp. v. Alsip, 880 F.2d 247, 249 (1…
discussed Cited "see" David Cooper, Inc. v. Contemporary Computer Systems, Inc.
Mo. Ct. App. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
See Triad Systems Corp. v. Alsip, 880 F.2d 247 (10th Cir.1989); Polycon Industries, Inc. v. Hercules Inc., 471 F.Supp. 1316 (E.D.Wis.1979); Hollingsworth v. The Software House, Inc., 32 Ohio App.3d 61 , 513 N.E.2d 1372 (1986).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
WASHINGTON STATE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, INC., a Washington Corporation, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Frank FORREST, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
85-4232.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Jul 25, 1989.
880 F.2d 247
Goodwin, Beezer, Nielsen.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

ORDER

Pursuant to the Supreme Court order, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 38, 102 L.Ed.2d 17, remanding this case for reconsideration in light of Patrick v. Burget, 486 U.S. 94, 108 S.Ct. 1658, 100 L.Ed.2d 83 (1988), reversing 800 F.2d 1498 (9th Cir.1986), this cause is REMANDED to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Upon reconsideration the District Court shall enter findings concerning the existence and scope of state review of the management of the apprenticeship program, following the guidance of the Patrick decision.