Curtiss v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n
Washington Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHamilton, J.
(concurring in part, dissenting in part) — I concur with the view of the majority opinion and of the Court of Appeals that the trial court properly granted a new trial upon the grounds asserted. I am likewise in accord with the majority determination that in Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wn.2d 522, 452 P.2d 729 (1969), we adopted *468the language, and the import thereof, found in the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A, comment g at 351 (1965), which places the burden of proof upon a plaintiff, alleging injury from a defective product, that the product was in the defective condition when it left…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1969
- Scanlan v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1965
- Pulley v. Pacific Coca-Cola Bottling Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1966
- Holdcroft v. Hahn Truck Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1967