In Re Hawaii Federal Asbestos Cases
District Court, D. Hawaii
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE STATE OF THE ART AS A DEFENSE TO THEIR STRICT PRODUCTS LIABILITY CLAIMS
BELLONI, District Judge.
Plaintiffs’ motion in limine asks the court to exclude “state of the art” evidence as a defense to their strict products liability claim. I denied the motion because the evidence is relevant to the plaintiffs’ negligence claim. However, I am striking the defense as it relates to plaintiffs strict liability claims.
BACKGROUND
This is a consolidated case wherein thirty-four former Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard employees seek damages against multiple defendants…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Barker v. Lull Engineering Co.California Supreme Court · 1978
- Feldman v. Lederle LaboratoriesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
- Phillips v. Kimwood MacHine CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1974
- Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
- Elmore v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1984
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.California Supreme Court · 1991
- Ranches v. City and County of HonoluluHawaii Supreme Court · 2007
- In Re Hawaii Federal Asbestos CasesDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1988
- Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.California Supreme Court · 1991