About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2017 through August 2018)

handle is hein.ali/resttpl4301 and id is 1 raw text is: TORTS 3D: PRODUCTS LIABILITY Generally La.2017. Cit. generally in disc. In a wrongful-death action brought by father of deceased boat passenger against, among others, manufacturer of the boat's steering system, which had failed, this court affirmed in part judgment on a jury verdict for plaintiff, holding, inter alia, that defendant's proposed jury instruction on the duty of a component-part manufacturer was not the correct law, because the steering system itself was alleged to be defective and was not a special adaption. The court applied the component-parts doctrine set forth in Restatement Third of Torts: Products Liability § 5, noting that federal courts generally employed the Restatement in applying federal maritime law. Warren v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Company, 233 So.3d 568, 583. CHAPTER 1. LIABILITY OF COMMERCIAL PRODUCT SELLERS BASED ON PRODUCT DEFECTS AT TIME OF SALE TOPIC 1. LIABILITY RULES APPLICABLE TO PRODUCTS GENERALLY § 1. Liability of Commercial Seller or Distributor for Harm Caused by Defective Products Ill.App.2017. Com. (e) quot. in conc. and diss. op. Worker filed a products-liability claim against manufacturer of a flexible bulk container and distributor of products stored inside the container, alleging that he was injured when the container ripped and leaked, causing another container to fall on him. The trial court granted distributor's motion to dismiss under a provision of the state's products-liability statute that allowed a nonmanufacturing defendant to be dismissed from a claim for strict liability in tort if it could identify the manufacturer and, after entering a default judgment against manufacturer, denied worker's motion to reinstate distributor as a defendant. This court reversed and remanded for a determination as to whether manufacturer was unable to satisfy any judgment against it, such that reinstatement of distributor would be appropriate. The concurring and dissenting opinion cited Restatement Third of Torts: Products Liability § 1 in arguing that, if the legislature had desired to include a plaintiff's inability to enforce a judgment as a statutory basis for reinstatement, it could have done so, and that the statutory provision at issue was one example of legislation enacted in many states that, to some extent, immunized nonmanufacturing sellers or distributors from strict liability. Cassidy v. China Vitamins, LLC, 89 N.E.3d 944, 959. § 2. Categories of Product Defect E.D.Ky.2017. Cit. in disc. Patient who was prescribed a generic drug for a heart condition and subsequently suffered blindness from drug toxicity brought an action against generic drug manufacturer, asserting, inter alia, claims under Kentucky law for failure to warn under strict products-liability and negligence theories, alleging that defendant failed to provide a medication guide and adequate product warnings. This court granted in part defendant's motion to dismiss, holding, inter alia, that plaintiff s failure-to-warn claims were preempted by federal law. Citing Restatement Third of Torts: Products mA L I For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most