Eriksen v. Mobay Corp.
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtKurtz, C.J.
—Alleging that he was damaged by exposure to pesticides, Peter Eriksen sued the pesticide’s manufacturer, the applicators, and his neighbors under theories of negligence, strict liability, trespass, and product liability. Prior to trial, his claim against the pesticide’s manufacturer was dismissed on summary judgment because the court held that the claim was preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Mr. Eriksen’s remaining claims were dismissed when he did not personally appear for trial. Mr. Eriksen appeals both the summary judgment dismissal of his claim…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Hansen v. FriendWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Falk v. Keene Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1989
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- McClarty v. Totem ElectricCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
- Thongchoom v. Graco Children's Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2003
- In re the Personal Restraint of CraceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
- McClarty v. Totem Elec.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2003
- Eriksen v. Mobay Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2002
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.