Legal Opinion

Sierocinski v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided April 24, 1939No. 6998PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BIDDLE, Circuit Judge.

The plaintiff’s “statement of claim” (complaint), amended under an order of court granting defendant’s motion for a more definite statement under Rule 12(e), Rules of Civil Procedure for District Courts, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, alleged that he was injured by the premature explosion of a dynamite cap. Specifically the plaintiff claimed as negligent acts the manufacturing and distributing of the cap “in such a fashion that it was unable to withstand the crimping which defendant knew it would be subjected to”; and distributing a cap so constructed that it would…

2Cited by46 opinions

  1. Continental Collieries, Inc. v. ShoberCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
  2. Leimer v. State Mut. Life Assur. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1940
  3. United States v. Association of American RailroadsDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1945
  4. Newberg v. American Dryer CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
  5. Rogers v. Tri-State Materials Corp.District Court, N.D. West Virginia · 1970

41 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