Legal Opinion

Deines v. Vermeer Manufacturing Co.

District Court, D. Kansas

Decided December 4, 1990No. Civ. A. 88-2052-0PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

EARL E. O’CONNOR, Chief Judge.

This matter comes before the court on the motion of defendant Vermeer Manufacturing Company (hereinafter “Vermeer Manufacturing”) for summary judgment. Vermeer Manufacturing contends that Robert E. Deines (hereinafter “Deines”) may not recover under section 402A of Restatement (Second) of Torts because warnings on the hay baler in question, if heeded, would have prevented plaintiff’s injuries. Deines insists that the hay baler’s warnings were inadequate. Defendant also claims that Deines may not recover under section 402A or on a negligence…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Brown v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Brown v. KeillSupreme Court of Kansas · 1978

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Miller v. Lee Apparel Co.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 1994
  2. Dea Richter v. Limax International, Inc., Lmx-Manufactures Consultants, Inc., Dea Richter v. Limax International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
  3. Pfeiffer v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.District Court, D. Kansas · 1991
  4. Delaney v. Deere and Co.District Court, D. Kansas · 1997
  5. Miller v. CNH Industrial America LLCDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API