Joseph W. Spangler v. Kranco, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1DissentButzner, Circuit Judge
(dissenting) :
I dissent because I believe the district court erred in withdrawing the case from the jury. Under Virginia law, the manufacture of a product, which— though not dangerous in itself — becomes dangerous when it is used in its customary or ordinary manner, owes a duty of reasonable care to any person who might foreseeably be injured because of the product’s negligent design or manufacture. Olds v. Wood, 196 Va. 960, 86 S. *376E.2d 32, 34 (1955) (dictum); Restatement (2d) of Torts §§ 388, 395, 398 (1965). While it may be said that Kranco’s crane was not inherently dangerous, it cannot be…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. BehymerSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Grady Paul Chestnut v. Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1971
- Fauver v. BellSupreme Court of Virginia · 1951
- Littlehale v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1966
- Adelbert Littlehale and Erwin Zelanko v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.