529 results for 'cat:"Product Liability"'.
J. Nucor denies, in part, a steel manufacturer's motion to dismiss a couple's claims related to the death of their son, who died from a gunshot wound after testing an allegedly faulty bullet-proof vest. The couple has adequately pleaded their manufacturing defect claim.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Bell, Filed On: June 7, 2023, Case #: 3:23CV29, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: product Liability, Wrongful Death
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Winmill grants in part cross-motions for sanctions for spoliation of evidence in a product liability suit after an employee was injured when a forklift failed. The workers compensation insurer alleges that the forklift manufacturer did not return a hydraulic cylinder until after discovery had closed and sold the forklift attachment at issue, and the manufacturer alleges that the insurer failed to preserve daily vehicle inspection reports. The forklift manufacturer did spoliate evidence as the forklift attachment is relevant to the claims at issue and the manufacturer's tests and inspections of the attachment are therefore excluded. The insurer had a duty to retain inspection records because they should have known the records would be relevant to the insurer's defenses. The manufacturer is entitled to a permissive adverse inference that the records would have favored the manufacturer's version of events.
Court: USDC Idaho, Judge: Winmill, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv376, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, Sanctions, product Liability
J. Riggs issues partially redacted findings of fact in a wrongful death suit against a tire company alleging that manufacturing and design defects on a tire led to a deadly car accident. There was “no defect” in the subject tire, the tire company was “not negligent,” and claims centered on alleged negligence or product defects therefore fail.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Riggs, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 1:17cv922, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Negligence, product Liability, Wrongful Death
J. Berger overrules the automotive manufacturer’s objections and adopts the magistrate judge’s report finding the company failed to meet its discovery obligations which not only caused discovery to be reopened, but also prevented a “good faith, productive mediation” in the New York resident’s suit over injuries he and his son sustained in 2020 after crashing their utility terrain vehicle. The court concurs that the manufacturer’s conduct is so egregious as to impose monetary sanctions against it for the legal fees and expenses the resident incurred associated with pursing his motion as well as a jury instruction prior to trial.
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Berger, Filed On: May 31, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv501, NOS: Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Sanctions, product Liability, Discovery
J. Menendez grants the tractor maker's motion for summary judgment in the insurer's twin suits against it alleging that defects in tractors it built without engine side shields in a "special manufacturing year" led two tractors sold to the insurer's insured to catch fire. The lack of side shields was a deliberate choice by the manufacturer, not a manufacturing flaw, nor was it a departure from the intended design despite holes in the frame used for the shields' installation in the prior regular model year. The tractors' warranties therefore are not implicated, since the insurer has not identified a defect to which they apply. The insurer's motion to exclude testimony from the tractor maker's expert is also denied.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Menendez, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: 0:21cv1200, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: product Liability, Experts, Warranty
J. Welling finds the trial court properly found in favor of the senior healthcare facility on its breach of contract claim stemming from a defect in the design and installation of air conditioning units. The AC units were inoperable after they were installed. The pretrial order determining the limitation of liability was improperly entered though because the property, located on land zoned as “commercial” or “mixed use” — which constitutes “residential property” — makes it subject to the Homeowner Protection Act. Affirmed in part. Reversed in part.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Welling, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: 21CA0906, Categories: Construction, product Liability, Contract
J. O'Leary finds the trial court properly ruled in favor of Kia in this suit alleging an auto defect. Though the court rejected Kia’s excuses for withholding certain documents, it did not find that it intentionally concealed them. It was appropriate to refuse to instruct the jury that Kia had concealed evidence. The auto customer forfeits the issue, misrepresenting to the California Court of Appeals that the trial court in fact found concealment. Also, Kia’s paralegal, who verified discovery requests and whose testimony was excluded, had no helpful knowledge for the jury. The customer made no timely objection to the size of the jury room and thus waived the objection that the jurors felt rushed. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: O’Leary , Filed On: May 24, 2023, Case #: G060912, Categories: Evidence, Jury, product Liability
J. Nagala grants the parents' motion to remand to the Connecticut Superior Court, ruling this court lacks jurisdiction over their suit against the social media platforms because the plaintiffs and the individual defendants are based in Connecticut. Although Meta Platforms argues the individual defendants who sexually assaulted the social media user were misjoined to the action to prevent removal to this court, there is no egregious conduct on the part of the parents, while the individual defendants' actions are at least somewhat related to the claims against the social media platforms.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Nagala, Filed On: May 24, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv284, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Negligence, product Liability, Jurisdiction
J. Limbaugh partially denies Makita's motion to dismiss a product liability suit alleging it fails to put an expiration date on its bonded abrasive wheels used to cut metal and concrete. The consumer need not plead his specific purpose for purchasing the product to sue under the Missouri Merchandising Practice Act, and he sufficiently pleaded damages. However, the consumer failed to comply with the notice requirements to make a claim for breach of implied warranty.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Missouri, Judge: Limbaugh, Filed On: May 24, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv79, NOS: Tort Product Liability - Real Property, Categories: product Liability, Warranty