Vincer v. Esther Williams All-Aluminum Swimming Pool Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtConnor T. Hansen, J.
The sole issue on this appeal is whether the complaint states a cause of action against the Esther Williams All-Aluminum Swimming Pool Company and the Banner Builders, Inc., and their insurers. We conclude that it does not. Therefore, we affirm the trial court in its decision sustaining the demurrer.
In Dippel v. Sciano,1 this court adopted sec. 402A of Restatement, 2 Torts 2d,2 pertaining to strict liability in *330tort. Under this section, where the plaintiff proves he was injured by a product “in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user" and establishes the other requisite…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Dippel v. ScianoWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Schuh v. Fox River Tractor Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Arbet v. GussarsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Netzel v. State Sand & Gravel Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- Powers v. Hunt-Wesson Foods, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
3Cited by64 opinions
- Tincher, T. v. Omega Flex, Inc., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Caterpillar, Inc. v. ShearsTexas Supreme Court · 1995
- Glittenberg v. Doughboy Recreational IndustriesMichigan Supreme Court · 1992
- Sumnicht v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1984
- Greiten v. La DowWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.