Legal Opinion

prod.liab.rep. (Cch) P 14,151 Cleveland London v. Mac Corporation of America

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided February 13, 1995No. 94-30239PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROBERT M. PARKER, Circuit Judge:

Plaintiff-Appellant Cleveland London (“London”) appeals the district court’s granting of Defendant-Appellee MAC Corporation of America’s (“MAC”) motion for judgment as a matter of law on the ground that there was no evidentiary basis for the jury to find that MAC should have reasonably anticipated that the gearbox cover on the shredder MAC designed and manufactured would be used as a work station. London also appeals the court’s ruling that London’s expert was not qualified to give opinion testimony on the design of the shredder. We affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Robertson v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
  2. Jack R. Edmonds v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
  3. Board of Trustees, State Employees Group Benefits Program v. MoncrieffeLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1994

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Perez v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional DivisionCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2004
  2. Guillory v. Domtar Industries Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
  3. Soledad v. United States Department of TreasuryCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2002
  4. Ellis v. Weasler Engineering Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
  5. Delphen v. Dept. of Transp. & Dev.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1995

17 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