Legal Opinion

Hiller v. Kawasaki Motors Corp., USA

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided August 12, 1983No. 6701PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

COMPTON, Justice.

This is an appeal brought by George Hil-ler from a judgment, entered in accordance with a jury verdict, denying Hiller any re covery on his claims for negligence and strict products liability against the defendants, Kawasaki Motors Corp. and Persinger’s Marine. Hiller contends that the judgment should be reversed because the superi- or court erred in excluding certain evidence and in giving certain jury instructions. Hiller also objects to the award of attorney’s fees made to the defendants by the superior court. For the reasons set forth below, we find no reversible…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Fields v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1976
  2. Malvo Ex Rel. Malvo v. J. C. Penney Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Reginald Carter v. Lowell D. Hewitt, Superintendent John Fuiek, C.O. Duane D. Pyles, C.O. And Gilbert Levi, C.O.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
  4. Jiminez v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.California Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc. v. DayAlaska Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Dura Corp. v. HarnedAlaska Supreme Court · 1985
  2. King v. Kayak Manufacturing Corp.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1989
  3. General Motors Corp. v. FarnsworthAlaska Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Liimatta v. VestAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Getchell v. LodgeAlaska Supreme Court · 2003

16 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