Legal Opinion

Crowston v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided September 9, 1994No. Civ. 930236PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VANDE WALLE, Chief Justice.

Curtis Crowston appealed from a final judgment, entered upon a summary judgment on his post-sale duty to warn claim and a jury verdict on his other claims, dismissing his products liability action against Kelsey-Hayes Company and The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. We hold that, under negligence principles, when manufacturers learn about dangers associated with the use of their product after it is manufactured and sold, they have a post-sale duty to take reasonable steps to warn foreseeable users about those dangers. We therefore reverse the summary judgment…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. ZenobiaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  2. Cover v. CohenNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Janich Bros., Inc. v. The American Distilling Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
  4. Comstock v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Technical Chemical Company v. JacobsTexas Supreme Court · 1972

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Hurt v. FreelandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Erickson v. BrownNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Diegel v. City of West FargoNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Tansy v. Dacomed Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994
  5. State v. ChristensenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997

33 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