Kyrtatas v. Stop & Shop, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtShea, J.
The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether common law indemnity principles based on the concept of active versus passive liability apply in the context of a statutory product liability action. We conclude that these principles do not apply in this area and find error. We set aside the judgment for the named defendant, Stop & Shop, Inc. (Stop & Shop), on its cross complaint for indemnification from the defendant Shield Packaging Company, Inc. (Shield Packaging), and remand the case to the trial court with direction to modify the judgment in accordance with the jury’s findings concerning…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Dole v. Dow Chemical Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Kennedy v. City of SawyerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1980
- Kaplan v. Merberg Wrecking CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
- Robinson v. Unemployment Security Board of ReviewSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Duguay v. HopkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by80 opinions
- Ferryman v. City of GrotonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Potter v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Burkert v. Petrol Plus of Naugatuck, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- Skuzinski v. Bouchard Fuels, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
75 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.