Legal Opinion

Glass v. Stahl Specialty Company

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 7, 1982No. 48227-6PublishedCited by 86 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.

The sole issue in this case is whether an equipment manufacturer is entitled to contribution from an employer when a workman sues the manufacturer for injuries suffered on the job as a result of the alleged concurrent negligence of the manufacturer and the employer. The trial court ruled that an action for contribution under RCW 4.22.040 could be maintained against the employer. We reverse.

The facts in this case are not disputed upon appeal. The plaintiff, James Glass, alleged in his complaint that he was severely injured on October 3, 1979, when an aluminum die cast molding machine closed on…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. MacKeySupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  2. Dole v. Dow Chemical Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
  3. Skinner v. Reed-Prentice Division Package MacHinery Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Maio v. FahsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  5. Seattle-First National Bank v. Shoreline Concrete Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1978

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

3Cited by86 opinions

  1. Hangman Ridge Training Stables, Inc. v. Safeco Title InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Hartley v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Martin v. Abbott LaboratoriesWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Washburn v. Beatt Equipment Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Lutheran Day Care v. Snohomish CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1992

81 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