Perry W. Orfield v. International Harvester Company and Power Equipment Company
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Per curiam
This is an appeal from a directed verdict for the defendants granted at the close of the plaintiff’s proof in a products liability action. Jurisdiction of the district court was properly invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because of diversity of citizenship and the requisite jurisdictional amount.
Plaintiff Perry W. Orfield had worked for many years as an operator of heavy equipment and had operated bulldozers both with and without steel canopy guards. On September 8, 1972, while in the employ of Wilson and Clark, Inc., he was directed by his foreman to use a particular bulldozer to windrow, or…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Commissioner v. Estate of BoschSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
- Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
- Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Suvada v. White Motor Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1965
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- George BAILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Y & O PRESS COMPANY, INC., Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985
- Wyatt v. Winnebago Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1977
- Clark v. Boeing CompanyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
- Gann v. INTERN. HARVESTER CO. OF CANADA, LTD.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1986
- Vanover v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1986
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.