Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Sylvania Electric Products, Inc. v. Irene Barker, Irene Barker v. Sylvania Electric Products, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided March 12, 1956No. 4992-4994Published

1ConcurrenceMagruder, Chief Judge

I concur in the opinion and judgment of the court.

It is undisputed that under the substantive law of Nebraska a manufacturer owes a duty of ordinary care to remote but foreseeable users of his manufactured products, and is liable to such users for harm proximately caused by the manufacturer’s negligence. If suit had been brought in a Massachusetts state court on this alleged Nebraska tort, no doubt the Massachusetts courts would apply the foregoing substantive law of Nebraska. See Peterson v. Boston & Maine R. R., 1941, 310 Mass. 45, 36 N.E. 2d 701. Judge Woodbury’s opinion has found…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Sweeney v. ErvingSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. United States v. HullCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1952
  3. Benedict v. Eppley Hotel Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Peterson v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
  5. Miratsky v. BesedaNebraska Supreme Court · 1941

3 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