Legal Opinion
Phillips v. Morbark, Inc.
District Court, D. South Carolina
Decided January 5, 2007No. C.A. 9:05-2446-PMDPublished
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
DUFFY, District Judge.
This matter is before the court upon Defendant Morbark, Inc.’s (“Defendant” or “Morbark”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ defective remote control claims. For the reasons set forth herein, the court denies Defendant’s motion.
BACKGROUND
On March 15, 2003, Plaintiff Michael J. Phillips (“Plaintiff’) was injured while using the Morbark Model 4600 Wood Hog, which is a wood grinding machine. The Morbark Model 4600 Wood Hog had a remote control, and the remote control had seven toggle switches that controlled various functions of the wood grinder. The…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Arnold G. Barwick v. The Celotex Corporation, Keene Corporation, Pittsburgh Corning Corporation, H.K. Porter, Forty-Eight Insulations, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1984
- Perini Corporation v. Perini Construction, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1990
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.