Legal Opinion

Allstate v. Grohe Canada, Inc.

District Court, D. New Hampshire

Decided February 13, 2018No. 17-cv-50-SMPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Plaintiff v. Case No. 17-cv-50-SM Opinion No.

2018 DNH 032

Grohe Canada, Inc., Defendant O R D E R Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company, as subrogee, brings this action against Grohe Canada, Inc. Allstate claims that Grohe Canada designed, manufactured, and/or sold a defective valve (known as the “Tempress II”) that was a component in a shower valve assembly installed in the home of its insured. That valve allegedly failed, the insured’s home flooded, and, pursuant to its…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Daimler AG v. BaumanSupreme Court of the United States · 2014

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Thomas H. Saliba v. Greenfield, Stein & Senior, LLPDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API