Legal Opinion
Ford Motor Co. v. Rushford
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided June 29, 2007No. 20S03-0610-CV-350PublishedCited by 69 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUCKER, Justice.
Summary
A retail merchant has a duty to warn a buyer of the danger posed by a product it sells. However, absent special circumstances not present in this case, if the manufacturer provides adequate warnings of the danger of the product and the seller passes these warnings along to the buyer or consumer, then the seller has discharged its duty to warn.
Facts and Procedural History
In May 2002, along with her husband, then seventy-year-old Marilyn Rushford purchased a new 2002 Ford Focus Wagon from Eby Ford Lincoln Mercury a/k/a Eby Ford Sales, Inc. (“Eby”). When the couple bought…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Benton v. City of Oakland CityIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
- Peters v. ForsterIndiana Supreme Court · 2004
- Natural Gas Odorizing, Inc. v. DownsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1997
- Hoffman v. E.W. Bliss Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1983
- Dias v. Daisy-HeddonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1979
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by69 opinions
- Williams v. TharpIndiana Supreme Court · 2009
- April Goodwin, Tiffany Randolph and Javon Washington v. Yeakle's Sports Bar and Grill, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 2016
- Kroger Co. v. PlonskiIndiana Supreme Court · 2010
- Donald Timm v. Goodyear Dunlop Tires North AmCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019
- Kovach v. Caligor MidwestIndiana Supreme Court · 2009
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.