Werner v. Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Co.
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
The appellant’s contention on appeal is that proof of actual damages is not an essential part of a plaintiff’s case under the doctrine of strict liability in tort in the area of products liability. The appeallant fails to cite any authority for this claimed error and as such this court need not consider it. Bradshaw v. General Electric Co., 91 Nev. 124, 531 P.2d 1358 (1975); General Electric Co. v. Bush, 88 Nev. 360, 498 P.2d 366 (1972). Further, such a contention is without merit for actual injury must be shown to recover on a theory of strict liability in tort and mere nominal'…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- General Electric Company v. BushNevada Supreme Court · 1972
- Ginnis v. Mapes Hotel CorporationNevada Supreme Court · 1970
- Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Company v. DolinskiNevada Supreme Court · 1966
- Bradshaw v. General Electric CompanyNevada Supreme Court · 1975
4Cited by3 opinions
- Amerco v. ShoenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
- Bennett v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of MarylandNevada Supreme Court · 1982
- Cooper v. Pacific Automobile InsuranceNevada Supreme Court · 1979