Karst v. Shur-Co.
South Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
■ZINTER, Justice.
[¶ 1.] Richard and Susan Karst sued Shur Company and Wilson Trailer Company on negligence arid strict-liability causes of action.1 Karsts alleged defective design and improper warnings relating to Shur’s electric-tarp system that Wilson included on a grain trailer it sold to Richard. The circuit court granted summary judgment against Karsts on their failure-to-warri claims, and a jury found in favor of Defendants on Karsts’ remairiing claims. On appeal Karsts argue that the circuit court erred in instructing the jury, in granting summary judgment on the improper-warm ing…
2Cases cited58 opinions
- Cronin v. J.B.E. Olson Corp.California Supreme Court · 1972
- Lloyd v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
- Sollami v. EatonIllinois Supreme Court · 2002
- Seattle-First National Bank v. TabertWashington Supreme Court · 1975
- Nesselrode v. Executive Beechcraft, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1986
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Stern Oil Co. v. BrownSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2018
- Bruce Lindholm v. BMW of North America, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
- S.D. Petroleum Release Compensation Fund v. BpSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2020
- Lindholm v. BMW of North America, LLCDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2016
- Mendenhall v. SwansonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2017
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.