Hopfer v. Neenah Foundry Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtKurt S. Odenwald, Judge
Introduction
Appellants Norman and Terri Hopfer (collectively referred to as “Hopfer”) appeal from the judgment of the trial court denying Hopfer’s motion for new trial, following a jury verdict in favor of Respondent Neenah Foundry Company (“Nee-nah”). Norman Hopfer suffered injuries when he lost control of his pickup truck after driving over an open drainage inlet. At least one of the grates covering the inlet had become dislodged. Hopfer filed suit against Neenah, the grate manufacturer, under a strict products liability theory. Hopfer alleged that the drainage grates used to cover the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Blevins v. Cushman MotorsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1977
- Nesselrode v. Executive Beechcraft, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1986
- Elmore v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1984
- Klotz v. St. Anthony's Medical CenterSupreme Court of Missouri · 2010
- State v. WestfallSupreme Court of Missouri · 2002
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Janusz v. Symmetry Medical Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2017
- Stough v. BreggMissouri Court of Appeals · 2016
- Rhodes v. Kandlbinder, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2018
- SHAWN R. MITCHELL v. LOREN KEITH WILSON and LOREN L. WILSON, Defendants-Respondents.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2016
- CHARLES RANDOLPH HARRELL v. BMS PARTNERS, LLC d/b/a BROWARD MOTORSPORTSDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2022
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.