Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In re Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases—Report No. 09-10

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided May 17, 2012No. SC09-1264Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partQuince, J.

I agree with Chief Justice Canady that we should not authorize for publication or use new standard instruction 403.10 (Negligence Failure to Warn). However, I also conclude that standard instruction 403.18 as modified should be authorized for publication and use.

APPENDIX

PL

PRODUCT LIABILITY

Issues

PL4 — Express-warranty

PL 2 — Implied warranty of merchanta-

bility

PL 3 — Implied warranty of fitness for

particular purpose

PL 4 — Strict—liability - (manufacturing

defect)

PL-5 — Strict liability (design-defect) Burden of-pr-oof (greater — weight of the

Defense issues

403 PRODUCTS LIABILITY

403.1 Introduction

4…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Barker v. Lull Engineering Co.California Supreme Court · 1978
  2. West v. Caterpillar Tractor Company, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1976
  3. Gibson v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1980
  4. Loftin v. WilsonSupreme Court of Florida · 1953
  5. Cassisi v. Maytag Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API