Pancratz v. Monsanto Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the Court
NEUMAN, Justice.
This appeal involves the “mere continuation” exception to the general rule of nonlia-bility for successor corporations. Appellant Monsanto Company, seeking indemnity from a corporation for injuries sustained when a worker on Monsanto’s building fell from a defective ladder installed by the corporation’s predecessor, urged an expansive application of the exception. The district court rejected Monsanto’s argument and determined the successor corporation was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Because we believe the directed verdict was not entered in error, we affirm.
I.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Turner v. Bituminous Casualty Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1976
- Raymond Leannais and Catherine Leannais v. Cincinnati, Incorporated and Cincinnati-Forte Company and Liberty Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
- Smith v. Smithway Motor Xpress, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1990
- Cyr v. B. Offen & Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1974
- Clarence Tucker, Jr. And Jean Tucker v. Paxson MacHine Company, William Thropp & Sons Company, Division of J.M.L. Trading CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- A. David Ostrem, Sr. v. Prideco Secure Loan Fund, LpSupreme Court of Iowa · 2014
- Winsor v. Glasswerks PHX, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
- Webster Industries, Inc. v. Northwood Doors, Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2004
- Adler v. I & M Rail Link, L.L.C.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1998
- Garcia v. Coe Manufacturing Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1997
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.