About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

Case Citations July 2015 through February 2016 [1] (2015-2016)

handle is hein.ali/restate0324 and id is 1 raw text is: 

                                       TORTS 2D


  D.N.M.2014.  Cit. generally in cases cit. in sup. and in ftn., cit. generally in ftn. In a case in which
  cancer-treatment facility filed, inter alia, a claim for tortious interference with existing and prospective
  economic advantage against owner of hospitals and insurance companies, this court denied in part
  defendant's motion for summary judgment, holding that plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to support that
  claim. In making its decision, the court acknowledged that the New Mexico Supreme Court looked to
  the Restatement Second of Torts for guidance when dealing with issues of first impression. New Mexico
  Oncology and Hematology  Consultants, Ltd. v. Presbyterian Healthcare Services, 54 F.Supp.3d 1189,
  1227, 1235, 1236.

  Miss.App.2014. Cit. in sup. Patient brought claims for, among other things, strict-products liability and
  product-liability negligence under the Mississippi Products Liability Act (MPLA) against nonprofit
  tissue bank, alleging that defendant provided contaminated or infected allograft (human tissue) for his
  knee surgery. The trial court granted summary judgment for defendant, finding that patient's claims
  under the MPLA  were precluded by Mississippi's public-health statute. Affirming, this court held that
  human tissue provided to others in medical procedures was not a product subject to products-liability
  law, and the distribution of human tissue, including reasonable payments for related services, did not
  constitute a sale for purposes of strict liability. The court pointed out that Mississippi recognized the
  strict-products-liability provisions found in the Restatement Second of Torts, and that Restatement Third
  of Torts: Products Liability § 19 clarified that human tissue, such as the allograft in this case, was
  excepted from designation as a product. Palermo v. LifeLink Foundation, Inc., 152 So.3d 1177, 1181.



  § 4. Duty

  E.D.Mich.2014. Cit. in disc., cit. in ftn. Employee and employer's workers' compensation insurer
  brought a personal-injury action against manufacturer, alleging that defendant designed, manufactured,
  and sold a machine that severed employee's hand because it lacked adequate safety measures. A
  magistrate judge denied plaintiffs' motion to dismiss defendant's notice of non-party fault. This court
  affirmed the magistrate judge's order, holding that defendant properly named employer and coworker in
  the notice as non-parties at fault because employer owed a duty to maintain a reasonably safe workplace.
  The court rejected plaintiffs' argument that, under Restatement Second of Torts § 4, employer did not
  owe a duty because there were no actions it could have taken to avoid liability, and explained that the
  workers' compensation act did not relieve employer of the statutory or common-law duty to provide a

_eAl ia      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 nearly 3,000 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:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most