Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Armentrout v. FMC Corp.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided December 14, 1992No. 91SC312Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Erickson
The court of appeals reversed a judgment entered on a defense verdict and ordered a new trial. Armentrout v. FMC Corp., 819 P.2d 522 (Colo.App.1991). We granted certiorari to review four issues.
1. Whether the “open and obvious” nature of a risk is a defense to a strict liability claim for failure to warn.
2. Whether the “benefit” of a specific design is an affirmative defense to a strict liability claim for defective design under the risk-benefit test.
3. Whether the jury must be instructed on the meaning of “defective” in the context of a strict liability claim for defective design.
4. Whether…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Micallef v. Miehle Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Campo v. ScofieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1950
- Union Supply Co. v. PustSupreme Court of Colorado · 1978
- Baughn v. Honda Motor Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1986
- Uptain v. Huntington Lab, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1986
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.