Legal Opinion
Hopper v. Crown
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Decided March 30, 1990No. 90-C-0142PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
558 So.2d 1117 (1990)
Kevin HOPPER
v.
CROWN, et al.
No. 90-C-0142.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
March 30, 1990.
Granted. Summary judgment reversed and vacated. Remanded for further proceedings.
2ConcurrenceLemmon, Justice
When a product is unreasonably dangerous in normal use and the seller knew or should have known of the defect, the seller has a duty to warn of the defect.
Whether the lack of a door or a restraining device rendered the forklift unreasonably dangerous in normal use is a contested issue of fact and law to be decided at trial.[1] If it is assumed for purposes of the summary judgment in this case that the product…
3Cases cited2 opinions
- Ingram v. Caterpillar MacHinery Corp.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1988
- Simmons v. Imperial Lloyds Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1990
4Cited by6 opinions
- Kelley v. Price-Macemon, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
- Adams v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2005
- Hopper v. CrownLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1994
- Viator v. P & a Well Service, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1993
- Alexander v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2013
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.