Legal Opinion
Meredith v. Glamorene Products Corp.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Decided August 9, 1972No. Civ. A. No. 69-C-542PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
REYNOLDS, District Judge.
In this case plaintiffs have sued each of three corporate defendants on six causes of action to recover damages for injuries allegedly caused by faulty construction, labelling, and sale of a bottle of Glamorene Drain Opener. Defendant Owens Illinois Company has brought a motion for summary judgment seeking to have three of these causes of action dismissed as to it,1 claiming that the applicable statute of limitations has run. Two of these causes of action, based on negligence and res ipsa loquitur, involve state-created rights and are before this…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Sentry Corporation and Sne Corporation v. Ethel R. Harris, as Trustee Under Trust Agreement Dated March 1, 1973Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- Riegel Textile Corporation v. Celanese CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Riegel Textile Corp. v. Celanese Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1980
- Schinker v. Ruud Manufacturing CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1974
- Krout v. BridgesDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1973