Legal Opinion

Larsen v. Pacesetter Systems, Inc.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided September 30, 1992No. 15106PublishedCited by 100 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

LUM, C.J.

This is an appeal and cross-appeal from a jury verdict in favor of plaintiffs David W. Larsen and Shirley Larsen on their breach of implied warranty claim against defendant Pacesetter Systems, Inc. (Pacesetter). Mr. Larsen was implanted with a Programalith III Series Model 241-6 pacemaker, one of a group of devices later recalled because of their potential to malfunction at temperatures slightly above normal body temperature. The jury awarded Mr. Larsen damages for injuries resulting from the removal and replacement of the device, and awarded Mrs. Larsen…

2Cases cited86 opinions

  1. Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Jones v. Rath Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Hillsborough County v. Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by100 opinions

  1. Denny v. Ford Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. Ellen Mendes v. Medtronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
  3. Jennifer Stamps v. Collagen CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
  4. Shoppe v. Gucci America, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Tabieros v. Clark Equipment Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1997

95 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