What is negligent products liability?

Useful Rulings on Products Liability – Negligent Products Liability

Recent Rulings on Products Liability – Negligent Products Liability

KRISTIN HIRAI, ET AL. VS SKATING EDGE ICE ARENA, ET AL.

The original complaint included causes of action for: Premises Liability (Skating Edge and Heindl); Dangerous Condition of Public Property (City of Los Angeles, City of Torrance, County of Los Angeles); Negligence (Jessica, Lonnie, and Tanesha Phillips; Tara and Sergio Fernandez); Strict Products Liability (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); Negligent Products Liability (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); Products Liability – Breach of Warranties (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); Wrongful Death/Survival

  • Hearing

TU THI VO ET AL VS MIGHTY U S A INC

Plaintiffs allege strict products liability, negligent products liability, breach of express and implied warranties, and negligence. Plaintiffs’ complaint arises from a defective milling machine that caused decedent Tuan Anh Cao’s death on January 20, 2017. On November 1, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint, naming Defendants Mighty U.S.A., Inc., Mighty Enterprises, Inc., The Machine Group, Inc., Acromil Corporation, and She Hong Industrial Co., Ltd.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

KRISTIN HIRAI, ET AL. VS SKATING EDGE ICE ARENA, ET AL.

The complaint includes causes of action for: Premises Liability (Skating Edge and Heindl); Dangerous Condition of Public Property (City of Los Angeles, City of Torrance, County of Los Angeles); Negligence (Jessica, Lonnie, and Tanesha Phillips; Tara and Sergio Fernandez); Strict Products Liability (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); Negligent Products Liability (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); Products Liability – Breach of Warranties (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); Wrongful Death/Survival (All

  • Hearing

DEBORAH MILLER VS PIH HEALTH HOSPITAL - DOWNEY, ET AL.

DISCUSSION Causation Causation is an essential element of strict and negligent products liability. (See Merrill v. Navegar, Inc. (2001) 26 Cal.4th 465, 479.) “[A]s a general rule, the imposition of liability depends upon a showing by the plaintiff that his or her injuries were caused by the act of the defendant or by an instrumentality under the defendant’s control.” (Setliff v. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co. (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 1525, 1533 [quotation and citation omitted].)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ROBERT JOSEPH YRIGOYEN VS ARTHREX, INC., ET AL.

., Beach District Surgery Center LP, and Coastal Ortho f/k/a Torrance Orthopaedic & Sports Medicine Group for (1) negligence, (2)-(5) strict products liability, (6) negligent products liability, (7) breach of express warranty, (8) breach of implied warranty, (9) medical malpractice, (10) negligent misrepresentation, and (11) negligent failure to recall. On September 10, 2020, plaintiff dismissed Beach District Surgery Center LP.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

KRISTIN HIRAI, ET AL. VS SKATING EDGE ICE ARENA, ET AL.

The complaint includes causes of action for: · Premises Liability (Skating Edge and Heindl); · Dangerous Condition of Public Property (City of Los Angeles, City of Torrance, County of Los Angeles); · Negligence (Jessica, Lonnie, and Tanesha Phillips; Tara and Sergio Fernandez); · Strict Products Liability (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); · Negligent Products Liability (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); · Products Liability – Breach of Warranties (SHARK Helmets North America, LLC); · Wrongful Death

  • Hearing

NADIA KINDA, ET AL. V. PANTOJA TRUCKING, INC., ET AL.

On February 26, 2019, with leave of court, Vilchis filed her first amended complaint which added a fourth cause of action against defendant Ford Motor Company (Ford) for strict products liability and a fifth cause of action against defendants Ford and Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company of Los Angeles (Enterprise) for negligent products liability. On March 5, 2019, Vilchis filed her notice of settlement and application for determination of good faith settlement.

  • Hearing

CLAUDIA VENEGAS VS SAN PEDRO FISH AND OYSTER CORPORATION

On March 10, 2020, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint to include an additional cause of action for strict and negligent products liability and a breach of implied warranty. On July 2, 2020, Defendant Lifetime Products, Inc. filed an application to admit Kelly H. MacFarlane, as counsel pro hac vice. On July 7, 2020, the Court set the hearing on the application for admission pro hac vice for August 13, 2020. Trial is set for September 17, 2020. PARTY’S REQUEST Kelly H.

  • Hearing

ROCHEL DISI VS TAD TANOURA M D ET AL

On September 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed the operative Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) for (1) medical malpractice, (2) medical battery, (3) medical malpractice – lack of informed consent, (4) strict products liability - manufacturing defect, (5) negligent design, (6) negligence, (7) strict products liability – failure to warn, and (8) negligent products liability – failure to warn. Biosphere and Merit are named defendants in the fourth through eighth causes of action. I.

  • Hearing

ROBERT CLARK VS CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY ET AL

DISCUSSION Causation Causation is an essential element of strict and negligent products liability, negligence, breach of implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of an express warranty. (See Merrill v. Navegar, Inc. (2001) 26 Cal.4th 465, 479 [products liability]; McIntyre v. Colonies-Pacific, LLC¿(2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 664, 671 [negligence]; Gutierrez v.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

TITIPHAN ART VUTIPRICHAR VS INSOMNIAC HOLDINGS, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

Plaintiff alleges negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress, premises liability, negligent products liability, and strict products liability in the complaint for a fog machine’s spraying of harmful chemicals on December 31, 2018. On March 1, 2019, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

AMIRONI RIOS, ET AL. V. OMAR CABRERA, ET AL.

Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges causes of action for (1) strict products liability, (2) negligent products liability, (3) general negligence, and (4) negligent infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiffs allege that Michelin negligently designed and manufactured the subject tire and that Costco and its store manager, Cabrera, failed to adequately inspect or provide adequate warnings concerning the tire. Michelin, Costco, and Cabrera deny the allegations. Plaintiffs and Michelin have reached a settlement.

  • Hearing

ZEKRIA V. MIRAMAR LABS

., Inc. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 413, 432; see also FAC ¶¶ 42-55.) 2nd cause of action, negligent products liability. The FAC alleges facts sufficient to constitute this cause of action. The FAC alleges duty, breach, and causation. (See Gonzalez v. Autoliv ASP, Inc., (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 780, 793; see also FAC ¶¶ 58-66.) The FAC does not clearly establish the learned intermediary affirmative defense on its face. (See Stella v. Asset Management Consultants, Inc., (2017) 8 Cal.

  • Hearing

MILAN BACOKA SR ET AL VS BEST BUY CO ET AL

The Complaint asserted causes of action for res ipsa loquitur, negligent products liability, and negligence against Best Buy, and contended that the flex line was not properly connected to the washing machine, causing a leak. (UMF 3.) Among Plaintiffs’ claims against Best Buy was the allegation that the washing machine was negligently installed. (UMF 4.) The FAC contains similar allegations. (UMF 5.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

BEE SWEET CITRUS, INC. V. STYLE-LINE CONSTRUCTION, INC., ET AL.

In its opposition Style-Line claims that its “equitable indemnity claims are based on strict and negligent products liability,” citing the FACC at paragraph 26. However, the FACC makes no mention of products liability, strict or negligence.

  • Hearing

ARACELI SICKLER VS ISLAND PACIFIC SUPERMARKETS INC ET AL

On July 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging four causes of action: (1) strict products liability; (2) negligent products liability; (3) warranty of merchantability; and (4) negligent misrepresentation. On January 15, 2019, Plaintiff filed the operative FAC alleging the same causes of action. On August 8, 2019, this court granted Defendants’ motion to strike punitive damages from the FAC with 30 days’ leave to amend. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

TU THI VO ET AL VS MIGHTY U S A INC

The complaint alleges strict and negligent products liability, breach of express and implied warranties, and negligence for a milling machine malfunctioning and killing Decedent Tuan Anh Cao on January 20, 2017. On November 1, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint to name Defendants Mighty Enterprises, Inc., Machine Group, Inc., Acromil Corporation, and She Hong Industrial Co. LTD. On January 17, 2019, the Court dismissed Defendant Acromi Corporatioon without prejudice.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

CLAUDIA VENEGAS VS SAN PEDRO FISH AND OYSTER CORPORATION

PARTY’S REQUEST Plaintiff asks the Court to grant leave for Plaintiff to file a second amended complaint (“SAC”) to allege a third cause of action for strict and negligent products liability against Doe Defendants.

  • Hearing

ROCHEL DISI VS TAD TANOURA M D ET AL

., and Merit Bioacquisition Co. for medical malpractice, medical battery, medical malpractice – lack of informed consent, strict products liability – design and/or manufacturing defect, negligent products liability – failure to warn, negligence per se, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, and misrepresentation.

  • Hearing

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

NUNEZ ET AL. V. MAZDA MOTOR CORP. ET AL.

Motion: Motions for Summary Adjudication by Mazda Motor Corporation and Mazda North America Operations Tentative Ruling: To grant Mazda Motor of America, Inc. dba Mazda North American Operations’ (“MNAO”) motion for summary adjudication of plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages and second cause of action for negligent products liability. (Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(f)(1).) To deny Mazda Motor Corporation’ (“MC”) motion for summary adjudication of plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages. (Code Civ.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

PETRONILA GONZALEZ VS NUTRIBULLET LEAN LLC

BACKGROUND On February 1, 2018, Plaintiff Petronila Gonzalez (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Nutribullet Lean, LLC, who subsequently represented itself as Defendant Nutribullet, LLC, (“Defendant”) alleging strict and negligent products liability and negligence for injuries sustained when removing an extractor blade from a Nutribullet on December 9, 2017.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

PEGGY KOGA, ET AL. VS LIVANOVA DEUTSCHLAND, GMBH, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, ET AL.

The complaint alleges strict products liability for a design defect, a manufacturing defect, and a failure to warn, as well as alleging negligent products liability and medical malpractice for the death of Peter Koga, which was caused from complications that resulted from an open-heart surgery and use of a Stockert Heater-Cooler System 3T on April 25, 2019. On September 3, 2019, Plaintiffs filed an application to admit Robin A.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

YVONNE KOR VS MCDONALD'S 16007, ET AL.

The Court finds Plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts to state a cause of action for negligent products liability. Plaintiff’s allegations show that facts have been alleged to support each element of negligent products liability. Demurring Defendant chooses to focus its attention on the title of Plaintiff’s second cause of action in the demurrer, as opposed to the substance of the allegations in this cause of action.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

MICHAEL FARHAT, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL. VS JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA LLC, ET AL.

Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against Defendants alleging causes of action for: (1) strict products liability; (2) negligent products liability; (3) breach of implied warranty under the Song-Beverly Act; (4) breach of implied warranty under California Commercial Code, Section 2314; and (5) negligence (wrongful death and personal injuries).

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

ALMIR MANSILLA VS HAAS AUTOMATION INC ET AL

Negligent Products Liability The doctrine of primary assumption of risk does not apply to claims for negligent products liability. (See Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. v. Superior Court (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 547, 562-565 (explaining why primary assumption of risk is inapplicable to claims for strict products liability); see also Bunch v. Hoffinger Industries, Inc. (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 1278, 1300-1302 (applying the ruling in Milwaukee to products liability based on negligence).)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

1 2 3     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.