A warning on a product may not bar liability, two courts hold in decisions citing the new Restatement

Article Abstract:

Rulings by the Texas Supreme Court and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals indicate that a warning on a product may not avoid product liability. The Texas Supreme Court ruling in Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co. v. Martinez concerned a tire explosion after the plaintiff saw and ignored a warning that tires must not be mounted on different-size tire rims. In the District of Columbia case, a road crew worker was injured by a milling machine when it backed up. In both cases, warnings could not trump all other factors.

Texas, Washington, D.C., Failure to warn (Law)

---

Set the dial for family-fare programs; software does the math on divorce and child support calculations - and more

Article Abstract:

Software assisting divorce lawyers determine alimony and child support by using preprogrammed calculations to factor in nuances in each state's child support guidelines has become available. The calculations also accept entries such as special medical needs, amount of time a child spends with each parent, and private schooling costs. Divorce lawyers should find a program that considers their state's guidelines in its calculations. Inventory builder programs allow development of a divorce settlement plan.

States, Software, Practice, Child support, Family law, Alimony

---

Guilt by association(s)? Injured plaintiffs sue groups that promote faulty products and standards

Article Abstract:

Plaintiffs in emulating the tobacco litigation by using novel claims against trade associations in negligence and product liability suits.The claims allege that these groups had conspiracies with manufacturers to promote faulty goods and set dangerous standards. Smokers had claimed in the tobacco litigation a conpiracy by trade groups to conceal the health risks of smoking. Experts state that the number of products liability cases will grow.

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: The right to a jury trial in actions under the Hatch-Waxman Act. Eli Lilly v. Barr Labs: is a new use of an old compound no longer patentable?
• Abstracts: Wishing on Winstar; S&L case may light the way for utility, housing suits. A penchant for privacy; court discourages advocates angling for openness
• Abstracts: Wash-sale rules mutual fund loss deductions. To deduct or capitalize: courts and IRS interpret Indopco. Planning pays for stock redemptions through related corporations
• Abstracts: Courts split on individuals' deficiency interest deduction. Tax court rejects stock aggregation; accepts minority discount
• Abstracts: Social responsibility and the marketing educator: a discussion document. The effect of moral philosophy and ethnocentrism on quality-of-life orientation in international marketing: a cross-cultural comparison

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.