Legal Opinion

Swenson v. Emerson Electric Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 20, 1985No. C8-84-188PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

We must decide whether the federal Consumer Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2051 et seq. (1982), provides a private cause of action for violation of the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s substantial product hazard reporting regulations. Plaintiff Janet Swenson sought to amend her complaint to include a claim under the Act. Defendants Emerson Electric Company and A.O. Smith Corporation opposed amendment of the complaint, contending that plaintiff has no cause of action under the Consumer Product Safety Act, and that the claim under the Act was barred by the statute of…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. General Electric Co. v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Vicki Lynn Drake v. Honeywell, Inc. v. Wagoner Water Heater Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1986
  2. Gavle v. Little Six, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
  3. Regie De L'Assurance Automobile Du Quebec v. JensenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
  4. Ronald Zepik v. Tidewater Midwest, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
  5. Production Credit Ass'n of Worthington v. Van IperenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986

27 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