Legal Opinion

Conwed Corp. v. Union Carbide Corp.

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided September 8, 2003No. Civil 5-92-88 (DDA/RLE)PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON BULK SUPPLIER / SOPHISTICATED USER GROUNDS

ALSOP, Senior District Judge.

This is a workers’ compensation subro-gation action under Minnesota law. Plain tiff Conwed Corporation (“Conwed”) paid workers’ compensation benefits to many of its former employees who developed asbestos-related diseases. Conwed claims that Defendant Union Carbide Corporation (“Union Carbide”) is liable to Conwed for those benefit payments because Union Carbide failed adequately to warn of the hazards of asbestos that Union Carbide manufactured and sold to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hapka v. Paquin FarmsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  2. UNITED FIRE & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. PAUL GARVEY — FENTON, L.L.C., INTERVENOR —Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2003
  3. Minneapolis Society of Fine Arts v. Parker-Klein Associates Architects, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  4. Hill v. Wilmington Chemical CorporationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
  5. Adkins v. GAF Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mack v. General Electric Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API