|
[09/03] Former egg farm workers say complaints ignored
[09/01] Federal agents descend on egg farms for 2nd time
[08/27] Europe probes swine flu shot, narcolepsy link
[08/26] Judge recommends $12M settlement on bad peanuts
[08/25] Egg recall has some changing buying, eating habits
More...
Articles
Power Tool Liability
If a manufacturer, or other supplier of power tools, sells a tool in an unsafe condition, because of a manufacturing or a design defect, and it damages property or injures someone, the injured party may have a claim against the manufacturer of the tool and possibly other parties in the chain of distribution. This type of claim is often referred to as a products liability claim. Common personal injuries resulting from defective power tools include burns, cuts, strains, electrical shock, debris in the eyes, fires, falls, explosions, and injuries from falling tools. Property damage can also result, either alone or in conjunction with personal injuries, especially in cases involving fires or explosions.
More...
Product Manuals and Instructions
You reviewed the manual, you read all the instructions, you followed them exactly, and still the machine malfunctioned, and you were injured. If you or someone in your family has been injured while using a product you believed to be safe, you may have the right to bring a claim against the manufacturer, distributor, or seller of the product in order to recover the damages you suffered. Such a claim is called a products liability suit. Liability in a products liability suit can be based on improper, inadequate, or erroneous product manuals and instructions. This liability often falls within the category of failure to warn. Failure-to-warn liability arises from the responsible party's failure to provide adequate warnings about possible injuries from a product's use.
More...
|
|
Case Summaries
[06/22] Aryeh v. Canon Bus. Solutions, Inc.
In plaintiff's suit brought under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), on behalf of himself and similarly situated persons who entered into copy rental agreements with defendant and who were overcharged for copies, trial court's judgment sustaining defendant's general demurrer without leave to amend is affirmed as plaintiff's UCL cause of action accrued more than four years before he filed his action, and the continuing violation doctrine does not apply to the circumstances of this case.
[06/21] Target Corp. v. US
Court of International Trade's affirmance of the U.S. Department of Commerce's final affirmative circumvention determination that petroleum wax candles with 50% or more vegetable wax are later-developed merchandise covered by the anti-dumping duty order on petroleum wax candles from China is affirmed as Commerce's reasonable interpretation of the relevant Congressional statute is entitled to Chevron deference and it's determination rested on substantial evidence.
[06/18] Michael Simon Design, Inc. v. US
In an appeal brought by three importers of foreign made goods from the Court of International Trade's denial of their request for judicial review of certain modifications to the U.S. Tariff schedule made by Presidential proclamation, the decision is affirmed where: 1) the Commission's recommendations under section 3005 are not "final" and consequently are not subject to judicial review under the APA; and 2) trial court correctly held that the Presidential proclamation at issue was not reviewable based on the claim that the Commission's recommendation was legally flawed.
[06/09] Walgreen Co. v. City and County of San Francisco
In plaintiff-Walgreen's challenge to a San Francisco ordinance banning the sale of tobacco products in certain retail establishments that contain a pharmacy, judgment of the trial court sustaining the city's demurrer without leave to amend is reversed in part as Walgreen's complaint adequately states a cause of action alleging an equal protection violation. Here, the challenged distinction among stores containing licensed pharmacies is not fairly related to the object of the prohibition on sales of tobacco products, as there is no rational basis to believe the supposed implied message conveyed by selling tobacco products at a Walgreens that has a licensed pharmacy is different in any meaningful way from the implied message conveyed by selling such products at a supermarket or big box store that contains a licensed pharmacy.
[06/07] In re: Sherwin-Williams, Co.
A defendant's petition for a writ of mandamus requesting that a district judge be recused from presiding over four cases against manufacturers of white lead carbonate pigments is denied as the petitioner has not established that a law review article co-written by the judge would make a reasonable, thoughtful, and well-informed observer question his impartiality.
More...
|
