Legal Opinion
Sharp v. Wyatt, Inc.
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided July 6, 1993No. 11315PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSchaller, J.
The plaintiffs1 appeal from the judgment of the trial court rendered after that court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The issues in this appeal implicate the scope of liability under the warnings provision of Connecticut’s product liability statute. General Statutes § 52-572q.2 Specifically, the plaintiffs claim that the trial court improperly (1) applied the principles governing summary judgment, (2) determined that under Connecticut law no warnings are required unless the product itself is defective,3 (3) found that any lack of warnings *827was not the legal cause of the…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Connell v. ColwellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Berry v. LoiseauSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Strada v. Connecticut Newspapers, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Daily v. New Britain Machine Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Annamarie Lamontagne, Doreen A. Festa and Susan B. Pregler v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
- Vitanza v. Upjohn Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- Sharp v. Wyatt, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Greco v. United Technologies Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.