Legal Opinion

Diviero v. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided May 29, 1997No. 96-15933PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHOY, Circuit Judge:

Richard Diviero and Kay Heminger (“Diviero and Heminger” or “appellants”) appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Company (“Uniroyal” or “appellee”). Diviero v. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co., 919 F.Supp. 1353 (D.Ariz.1996). Diviero and Heminger sued Uniroyal for personal injuries arising from an alleged product defect in a Uniroyal tire. Appellants offered expert testimony to prove the tire was defective, however, the district court refused to admit the testimony and granted summary judgment to Uniroyal.

The issues raised on…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Bagdadi v. NazarCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
  3. Dietz v. WallerArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Diviero v. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co.District Court, D. Arizona · 1996

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Cooper v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  2. Veronica Ollier v. Sweetwater Union High SchoolCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  3. Sport Dimension, Inc. v. the Coleman Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
  4. Cabrera v. Cordis Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  5. United States v. Nikolay SenchenkoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998

16 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