LORETO LUCIANO DE SALAS vs. SAN MIGUEL BREWERY CAR (Page-5)

there are other details which reinforce this conclusion, because although witness Gutierrez of
the defendant-appellee testified as follows:

"Court:

Q - Is that sufficient to make a bottle explode, because of the carbon
dioxide contained in the bottle of pale pilsen beer, with that pressure of 11
pounds per square inch?

A -1 do not think it is possible, Your Honor,

Q - Is it possible or impossible?

A -1 think it is impossible, Your Honor.

Q - Why?

A - Well, because as Mr, Unson testified last time, these can take as
high as 200 pounds per square inch.

Q - Without exploding?

A - Without exploding." T.S.N., 85, Vergara, 15 March, 1960;
witness Jose Gutierrez;

despite everything, even hi America, where it is supposed that similar if not better
methods than those of San Miguel are used, there have been cases and cases of spontaneous
explosions of bottled beverages as seen in the list of jurisprudence cited by the defendantappellee
itself in its brief:

Pages 13 to 24, viz: Wheeler vs. Laurel Bottling Works (1916) 51 SO
744 which deals with the explosion of a bottle of Coca-Cola; Loebig's
Guardian vs. Coca-Cola (1935) 81 SW 2nd, 910, the same; Pfefferkorn vs.
Kanner (1937) 59 P. 2nd, 447, the same, Auzenne vs. Gulf Pub. Serv. Co.
(1938) 181 SO 54, id. (1939) 188 SO. 512, the same; the same; in this case,
the Court observed that there was a possibility "of a bottle becoming too
highly charged with carbonated gas and this cannot always be detected by
the methods used"; Askenazi vs. Nehi Bottling Co, (1940) 8 SE5 2nd, 818, the
same, and in this case, the Judge made the observation that "a rapid change
of temperature would make them explode"; Dunn vs. Hoffman Beverage
(1941) 20 A, 2nd, 352, the same; Suter vs. Griesedeck, Western Brewery Co.
(1948) 193 P. 575, which dealt with the explosion of a bottle of beer; and
Gordon vs. Aztec Brewing Co.
bottle of beer which exploded,
(1948) 196 P. 2nd, 38 which also dealt with a bottle of beer which exploded,