Lippoldt v. Hartford Chemical Corp.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
1. The principal theory of liability advanced in this case was that the use of common calcium chloride pellets (such as those packaged and sold by the defendant) to melt sidewalk ice was unreasonably dangerous unless the pellets were applied in conjunction with a non-skid material, like sand or ashes, and that the defendant’s failure to warn accordingly constituted both negligence and a breach of the implied warranty of merchantability. In answers to special questions the jury rejected both contentions. The plaintiff’s extensive argument that their verdict must be set aside because it was not…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Riley v. DAVISON CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Ricky Smith Pontiac, Inc. v. Subaru of New England, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1982
- Lynn v. NashawatyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
- Banaghan v. DeweyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
- Dodge v. SawyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Beck v. City of EvansvilleIndiana Court of Appeals · 2006