Legal Opinion

Henry v. Panasonic Factory Automation Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided October 22, 2009No. 4-09-0057PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Myerscough

In June 2004, plaintiffs, Keith and Sue Henry, filed a two-count complaint against defendant, Panasonic Factory Automation Company (Panasonic), alleging Keith was injured at work while using equipment designed and manufactured by Panasonic that was unreasonably dangerous. Plaintiffs appeal from the trial court’s December 2008 decision to grant Panasonic’s motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

On June 30, 2004, plaintiffs filed a two-count complaint against Panasonic. In count I, Keith alleged Panasonic was engaged in business as a manufacturer of production machinery and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Williams v. ManchesterIllinois Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Lamkin v. TownerIllinois Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Mikolajczyk v. Ford Motor Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Blue v. Environmental Engineering, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Baltus v. Weaver Division of Kidde & Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1990

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Tyler Kirk v. Clark Equipment CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2021
  2. Salerno v. Innovative Serveillance Technology, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2010
  3. Evans v. BrownAppellate Court of Illinois · 2010
  4. Malen v. MTD Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
  5. Salerno v. INNOVATIVE SURVEILLANCE TECH.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2010

11 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