What is strict products liability?

Useful Rulings on Strict Products Liability

Recent Rulings on Strict Products Liability

126-150 of 625 results

EDITH ANNE PETRUCCI ET AL VS 7 ELEVEN DISTRIBUTION COMPANY

The authorities Bigler-Engler cites, however, involve strict products liability, not fraud. Bigler-Engler has not provided any reason to apply this duty to the fraud cause of action here, and we are aware of none. Products liability law involves a set of circumstances, elements, and doctrines that are independent from, and not directly applicable to, fraud. The duties underlying each cannot simply be applied to the other. [Citation.]” (Bigler-Engler, supra, 7 Cal.App.5th at 312 [italics added].)

  • Hearing

    Aug 07, 2019

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MIREYA AVILES MORALES VS CASA HERRERA INC ET AL

., Circle Foods LLC and Does 1-100 for: Strict Products Liability Negligent Products Liability On February 25, 2019, this action was transferred from the personal injury hub (Department 3) to this department. A Status Conference is set for August 7, 2019.

  • Hearing

    Aug 07, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

JAMES VALVA, ET AL. V. 3I INCORPORATED, ET AL.

While these duties certainly support claims for strict products liability and the like, as PSC notes in its Reply Brief, they do not, necessarily, support claims for fraudulent concealment. (See Bigler-Engler v. Breg, Inc. (Bigler-Engler) (2017) 7 Cal.App.5th 276, 312.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2019

  • Judge

    Monique Langhorne

  • County

    Napa County, CA

SEDLMEIER ROSEN VS CORE HEALTH & FITNESS LLC

As to the third issue, Defendant argues Plaintiff's strict products liability cause of action fails because the Defendant's primary objective is providing services, but products. The doctrine of strict liability in tort applies to producing and marketing enterprises responsible for placing products in the stream of commerce. (Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc., supra, 59 Cal.2d at p. 63.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 01, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

SEDLMEIER ROSEN VS CORE HEALTH & FITNESS LLC

As to the third issue, Defendant argues Plaintiff's strict products liability cause of action fails because the Defendant's primary objective is providing services, but products. The doctrine of strict liability in tort applies to producing and marketing enterprises responsible for placing products in the stream of commerce. (Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc., supra, 59 Cal.2d at p. 63.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 01, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

MICHAEL SHABSIS VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIF

In the first amended complaint (“FAC”), Plaintiff asserts causes of action for (1) medical negligence; (2) respondeat superior; (3) denial of medical care; (4) excessive force; (5) battery; (6) negligence; (7) strict product liability – failure to warn; (8) strict products liability – negligence; (9) breach of express warranty; (10) breach of implied warranty; and (11) negligence.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2019

MICHAEL SIMEON SMITH VS AMERICAN IDOL PRODUCTIONS INC ET AL

On December 12, 2016, Plaintiff filed the Complaint, alleging causes of action for: (1) negligence; (2) strict products liability: design defect; (3) strict products liability: failure to warn; (4) products liability: negligence; (5) breach of express warranty; and (6) breach of implied warranty. PRESENTATION: The instant motion for summary judgment or adjudication was filed by Defendant Future Sonics on May 10, 2019.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2019

MICHAEL SIMEON SMITH VS AMERICAN IDOL PRODUCTIONS INC ET AL

On December 12, 2016, Plaintiff filed the Complaint, alleging causes of action for: (1) negligence; (2) strict products liability: design defect; (3) strict products liability: failure to warn; (4) products liability: negligence; (5) breach of express warranty; and (6) breach of implied warranty.

  • Hearing

    Jul 19, 2019

SADOWSKI VS. VOLVO CAR USA LLC

Regarding the final factor, the decision in Tauber-Arons quotes at length from the decision in Tillman: " 'As to the risk-reduction aspect of strict products liability, the position of the used-goods dealer is normally entirely outside the original chain of distribution of the product. As a consequence, we conclude, any risk reduction which would be accomplished by imposing strict liability on the dealer in used goods would not be significant enough to justify our taking that step.

  • Hearing

    Jul 18, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

MARTHA MACHADO VS HELEN GRACE CHOCOLATES LLC ET AL

Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Adjudication on the Second Cause of Action for Strict Products Liability is DENIED. Ruling Defendants’ Motion for Summary Adjudication is DENIED as to the First, Second, and Third Causes of Action, and is GRANTED as to the Fourth Cause of Action.

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2019

  • Judge

    Salvatore Sirna or Gary Y. Tanaka

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

NAVARRO V. BLOWER DEMPSAY CORP.

Issue No. 2: Plaintiff’s cause of action for Strict Products Liability is barred by the exclusive remedy doctrine. The court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Adjudication as to Issue No. 2 because it is MOOT for the reasons stated in the court’s discussion as to Issue No. 4. Issue No. 3: Plaintiffs cause of action for Breach of Warranty is barred by the exclusive remedy doctrine.

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2019

ALEJANDRO DANIEL SANTIZO VS VISENTE SANDOVAL AGUALLO, ET AL.

., Rasier, LLC, and Rasier-CA, LLC for wrongful death, motor vehicle negligence, strict products liability, and negligent training, hiring, supervision, and retention arising out of a December 17, 2017 five-vehicle collision. Defendant moves to strike punitive damages allegations. II. LEGAL STANDARDS Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b)(1).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 12, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

KAIMULOA VS. INSOMNIAC HOLDINGS LLC

The complaint asserts nine counts including, breach of implied contract, negligence, strict products liability, premises liability, intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, and nuisance. Service of the summons and complaint was not seasonably made. Instead, plaintiff appeared ex parte on November 20, 2018, seeking an immediate transfer of the case to Los Angeles. ROA 14-16. [It bears repeating that plaintiff initially chose to file the case in San Diego.] Defendants filed opposition.

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ALLEN G SHAW ET AL VS ASHLAND LLC ET AL

USSC contends that Plaintiffs’ negligence-failure to warn and strict products liability-failure to warn claims are preempted by the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (“FHSA”), and its predecessor statute, as well as the regulations of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) regarding labeling of products containing benzene. “Congress enacted the FHSA in 1960 to provide nationally uniform requirements for adequate precautionary labeling of packages of hazardous substances.” ((W.M.

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

GALVEZ V. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR, CO.

To show strict products liability, plaintiff must show that car (or the relevant part) contained a manufacturing defect, or was defectively designed, or did not include sufficient instructions or warning of potential safety hazards. (CACI 1200.) The common predicate in both causes of action is the requirement that plaintiff show there was the existence of a design defect, and/or manufacturing defect, and/or a danger that required warning. Plaintiff’s discovery on the cause of the fire was limited.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2019

JAMES VALVA, ET AL. V. 3I INCORPORATED, ET AL.

While these duties certainly support claims for strict products liability and the like, as SWC notes in its Reply Brief, they do not, necessarily, support claims for fraudulent concealment. (See Bigler-Engler v. Breg, Inc. (2017) 7 Cal.App.5th 276, 312.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2019

KAIMULOA VS. INSOMNIAC HOLDINGS LLC

Count three fails to plead facts that a concert held on property set up as a concert venue is a product for purposes of strict products liability. Count three also fails to cite authority that a concert held on property set up as a concert venue is a product for purposes of imposing strict products liability. A concert is not a product; it is more akin to a service.

  • Hearing

    Jul 03, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

KAIMULOA VS. INSOMNIAC HOLDINGS LLC

Count three fails to plead facts that a concert held on property set up as a concert venue is a product for purposes of strict products liability. Count three also fails to cite authority that a concert held on property set up as a concert venue is a product for purposes of imposing strict products liability. A concert is not a product; it is more akin to a service.

  • Hearing

    Jul 03, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

KAIMULOA VS. INSOMNIAC HOLDINGS LLC

Count three fails to plead facts that a concert held on property set up as a concert venue is a product for purposes of strict products liability. Count three also fails to cite authority that a concert held on property set up as a concert venue is a product for purposes of imposing strict products liability. A concert is not a product; it is more akin to a service.

  • Hearing

    Jul 03, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

LILY DEUTSCH ET AL VS POLY & BARK ET AL

(collectively, “Defendants”) for strict products liability, negligent products liability, breach of warranty, and negligent infliction of emotional distress arising out of a September 7, 2017 incident where a sculpture coffee table purchased from Defendants broke, causing glass to fall on top of Lily, who was three years old at the time of the incident. Defendants move for summary adjudication as to cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress. II.

  • Hearing

    Jul 03, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

KAIMULOA VS. INSOMNIAC HOLDINGS LLC

Count three fails to plead facts that a concert held on property set up as a concert venue is a product for purposes of strict products liability. Count three also fails to cite authority that a concert held on property set up as a concert venue is a product for purposes of imposing strict products liability. A concert is not a product; it is more akin to a service.

  • Hearing

    Jul 03, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

NANAL, INC., A NEVADA CORPORATION VS SHOPIFY, INC., A CANADIAN CORPORATION, ET AL.

Jimenez did state the proposition that “the economic loss rule allows a plaintiff to recover in strict products liability in tort when a product defect causes damage to other property, that is, property other than the product itself.” (Id.) Here, Plaintiff alleges damage to its e-commerce site. Plaintiff provides no legal authority that indicates that deletion and destruction of historical and business data constitutes physical injury for a negligence cause of action.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

FIRST AMERICAN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY VS COWAY COMPANY, INC.

(“Defendant”) for negligence and strict products liability. On December 28, 2018, Defendant served Requests for Admission on Plaintiff. (Declaration of Keith A. Sipprelle, ¶ 3; Exh. A.) Plaintiff failed to respond, and Defendant seeks an order deeming the requests admitted and imposing monetary sanctions.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

NANAL, INC., A NEVADA CORPORATION VS SHOPIFY, INC., A CANADIAN CORPORATION, ET AL.

Jimenez did state the proposition that “the economic loss rule allows a plaintiff to recover in strict products liability in tort when a product defect causes damage to other property, that is, property other than the product itself.” (Id.) Here, Plaintiff alleges damage to its e-commerce site. Plaintiff provides no legal authority that indicates that deletion and destruction of historical and business data constitutes physical injury for a negligence cause of action.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

NATALIE RUBIO , ET AL. VS GENIE INDUSTRIES, INC. , ET AL.

The complaint alleges strict products liability, negligence, failure to recall/retrofit, and premises liability for the fatal falling of decedent Jamie Rubio from a Genie S-85 at Calabasas Country Club on August 31, 2017. On May 15, 2019, Defendant Knight-Calabasas, LLC dba Calabasas Country Club filed a cross-complaint against Roes 1 through 100 seeking indemnity, contribution, and an apportionment of fault.

  • Hearing

    Jun 28, 2019

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 25     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.