# Arizona v. Cook Paint & Varnish Co.

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · August 20, 1976 · 541 F.2d 226

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8899726

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE OF ARIZONA, in its own behalf and on behalf of its agencies, departments, commissions and political subdivisions v. COOK PAINT AND VARNISH COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 20, 1976
- **Citations:** 541 F.2d 226
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Sneed
- **Judges:** Duniway, Goodwin, Sneed
- **Cited by:** 20 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8899726

## Opinion text

SNEED, Circuit Judge
(concurring):
I concur in the foregoing opinion. It is necessary, however, to observe that this circuit has not in all instances denied recovery for an economic loss in actions based on negligence. See Union Oil Co. v. Oppen, 501 F.2d 558 (9th Cir. 1974). Judge Renfrew, however, in this case was correct in holding that the injury set forth in Counts Two and Three is the failure of the insulation purchased by the plaintiffs to meet their expectations in terms of performance. 391 F.Supp. at 971-72. Compensation for such an injury requires the existence of an undertaking by the seller that his goods will meet such expectations. A cause of action based on such an undertaking sounds in contract, not tort.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8899726. Public record. Not legal advice.