Etcheverry v. Tri-Ag Serv., Inc.
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BROWN, J.
The question presented by this case is whether state law claims for failure to warn of the risks of using a pesticide are preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. § 136 et seq.).
Unlike the Court of Appeal here, the overwhelming majority of the courts that have considered this question, including eight of the federal circuit courts of appeals, have concluded that state law failure-to-warn claims are preempted by FIFRA. (See, e.g., Grenier v. Vermont Log Bldgs., Inc. (1st Cir. 1996) 96 F.3d 559; King v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Co.…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLCSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Barrett v. RosenthalCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Trach v. FellinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- ALLIANCE TITLE COMPANY, INC. v. BoucherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Nelsen v. Legacy Partners Residential, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2012
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.