Legal Opinion

Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided July 7, 1982PublishedCited by 137 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Opinion of the Court was delivered by

PASHMAN, J.

The sole question here is whether defendants in a product liability case based on strict liability for failure to warn may raise a “state of the art” defense. Defendants assert that the danger of which they failed to warn was undiscovered at the time the product was marketed and that it was undiscoverable given the state of scientific knowledge at that time. The ease comes to us omappeal from the trial court’s denial of plaintiffs’ motion to strike the state-of-the-art defense. For the reasons stated below, we reverse the trial court…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Clarence Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation, Nationalsurety Corporation, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
  2. Suter v. San Angelo Foundry & MacHine CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
  3. Cepeda v. Cumberland Engineering Company, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1978
  4. Freund v. Cellofilm Properties, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
  5. Torsiello v. Whitehall LaboratoriesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1979

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

3Cited by137 opinions

  1. Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. ZenobiaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  2. Feldman v. Lederle LaboratoriesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  3. Halphen v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1986
  4. Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.California Supreme Court · 1991
  5. O'BRIEN v. Muskin Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1983

132 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