Priester v. Cromer
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Kittredge
This case concerns whether Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 205 (49 C.F.R. § 571.205 (1971)) preempts a state law products liability claim premised solely on a manufacturer’s choice of tempered glass for a vehicle’s side windows. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 205 (Regulation 205) mandates that “[grazing materials 1 for use in motor vehicles ... shall conform” to the American National Standard Institute “safety code for safety glazing materials.” Courts across the country faced with this issue have struggled with the preemptive effect, if any, of Regulation 205 and have reached…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Hillsborough County v. Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Wyeth v. LevineSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Geier v. American Honda Motor Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- MCI Sales and Service, Inc. v. HintonTexas Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
- Clifton A. Lake v. The Memphis Landsmen, LLCTennessee Supreme Court · 2013
- Priester v. CromerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2012
- City of Cayce v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2011
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.