Warzynski v. Empire Comfort Systems, Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
We first address the plaintiffs’ and defendant Safel’s appeal of the entry of summary judgment in favor of Empire Comfort Systems. Here, summary judgment was based on the sealed container defense of G.S. 99B-2(a). We hold that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for Empire because a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether Empire was the apparent manufacturer of the heaters. By so holding, we adopt § 400 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts and conclude that a seller who holds himself out to the public as the manufacturer of a product is not protected…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Rulane Gas Co. v. Montgomery Ward & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Bush v. BASF Wyandotte Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- Asheville Contracting Co. v. City of WilsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- Burton v. KenyonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Cambridge Homes of North Carolina Ltd. Partnership v. Hyundai Construction, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
- Sandra Ruffin Catherine Ruffin, by and Through Her Guardian Ad Litem, C. Timothy Williford v. Shaw Industries, Incorporated Sherwin-Williams CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1998
- Virmani v. Presbyterian Health Services Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
- Seaside Resorts, Inc. v. Club Car, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1992
- Sparks v. Oxy-Health, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2015
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.