Lippard v. Houdaille Industries, Inc.
Supreme Court of Missouri
1Opinion of the Court
BLACKMAR, Judge.
In this case of first impression with us we are called upon to decide whether the comparative fault principles of Gustafson v. Benda, 661 S.W.2d 11 (Mo. banc 1983) apply to strict products liability cases. After considering thorough briefs, excellent oral argument, cases from other jurisdictions, and scholarly writings, we conclude that comparative fault should not be applied in cases of this kind.
*492The facts are simple. The plaintiff had the duty of operating a planing machine in the course of his employment. The blades of the machine were protected by a metal guard which was…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Duncan v. Cessna Aircraft Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1984
- Suter v. San Angelo Foundry & MacHine CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
- Daly v. General Motors Corp.California Supreme Court · 1978
- Gustafson v. BendaSupreme Court of Missouri · 1983
- Keener v. Dayton Electric Manufacturing CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by93 opinions
- Lester v. SaylesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1993
- Evelyn and Jack Lewy v. Remington Arms Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1988
- Roberta Rae ADAMS, Appellee, v. FUQUA INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellant; Roberta Rae ADAMS, Appellant, v. FUQUA INDUSTRIES, INC., AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1987
- Business Men's Assurance Co. of America v. GrahamMissouri Court of Appeals · 1994
- Lay v. P & G Health Care, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2000
88 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.