Legal Opinion

Schall v. Sturm, Ruger Co., Inc.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided March 9, 1983No. 21874PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lewis, Chief Justice:

Under the provisions of Rule 46, Rules of Practice of the South Carolina Supreme Court, the following question has been certified to this Court by the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina: “Does a cause of action in strict liability exist under Section 15-73-10, Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1976, in favor of a party injured after July 9, 1974, by a product that was placed in the stream of commerce prior to codification of Restatement (Second) of Torts Section 402A?” We hold that such a cause of action does not exist.

Strict liability in tort…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Forrest City MacHine Works, Inc. v. Aderhold Ex Rel. Cross County BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1981
  2. Hercules Inc. v. South Carolina Tax CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1980
  3. Hyder v. JonesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1978
  4. Merchants Mutual Insurance v. South Carolina Second Injury FundSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1982
  5. Wansor v. George Hantscho Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1979

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Central Wesleyan College v. W.R. Grace & Co.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1992
  2. George Martin v. Fleissner GmbhCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1984
  3. Bray v. Marathon Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
  4. Scott v. Fruehauf CorporationSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1990
  5. City of Greenville v. W.R. Grace & Co.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1986

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

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

Powered by the Exa API