Dillard Department Stores, Inc. v. Associated Merchandising Corp.
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
JACOBSON, Presiding Judge.
The sole issue in this appeal is whether a broker which neither sold, manufactured, distributed, nor had any ownership or control over a product and which made no profit from its sale but which brought the manufacturer and seller together can be strictly liable for injuries resulting from that defective product. The trial court held that it could not, and granted summary judgment in favor of the broker. For the reasons expressed below, we affirm.
FACTS
The material facts are not in dispute. The plaintiff, Roger DeFrane, who is not a party on this appeal, was injured by…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Burnside v. Abbott LaboratoriesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Barth v. B. F. Goodrich Tire Co.California Court of Appeal · 1968
- OS Stapley Company v. MillerArizona Supreme Court · 1968
- Kasel v. Remington Arms Co.California Court of Appeal · 1972
- Nudelman v. Ferrer BolívarSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1978
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Antone v. GREATER ARIZONA AUTO AUCTION, INC.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- In Re Minnesota Breast Implant LitigationDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1998
- Grubb v. Do It Best CorporationCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- Felker v. McGhan Medical Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1998
- Antone v. Greater Arizona Auto Auction, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.