Legal Opinion · Dissent

Piercefield v. Remington Arms Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 1965No. Calendar 16, Docket 50,211PublishedCited by 207 opinions

1DissentO’Hara, J.

Gordon Piercefield, plaintiff here, was injured when the barrel of a shotgun, fired by his brother, exploded. Fragments of metal became imbedded in his brain. The shell fired was manufactured by the defendant, Remington Arms Co., Inc. Defendant Schaberg-Dietrich Hardware Company is the wholesaler, alleged to have sold the shell in question to defendant Scheidt’s Hardware. Norman Piercefield, plaintiff’s brother, claims to have purchased the shell from defendant retailer Scheidt. It is conceded that plaintiff was neither a purchaser nor a user of the shell. No claim is made that plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Ultramares Corp. v. ToucheNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
  4. Spence v. Three Rivers Builders & Masonry Supply, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Bricker v. GreenMichigan Supreme Court · 1946

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

3Cited by207 opinions

  1. Moning v. AlfonoMichigan Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Erling David Larsen v. General Motors Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1968
  3. West v. Caterpillar Tractor Company, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1976
  4. Codling v. PagliaNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
  5. Prentis v. Yale Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1985

202 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