Applying Georgia substantive law, manufacturer had no duty to warn.
Wiley explores the history of an attorney's duty to warn, examines the current status of the ethical rules and case law in Tennessee on the duty to warn, and proposes that Tennessee has greatly clarified the ethical guidelines for lawyers by mandating disclosure of confidential client information to save third parties from bodily harm or death. In addition, it questions whether tort liability is an inappropriate consequence for breach of the duty to warn.
BOISE, Idaho Schools must inform parents of students' suicidal tendencies only if the student shows a present trend toward taking his or her own life, the Idaho Supreme Court has ruled. The narrow interpretation of Idaho's "duty to warn" law was handed down Monday in a case that pitted the family of a teen who took his own life against two northern Idaho school districts.
..., a severe neurological disorder, warning labels forthe drug have been strengthened and clar... these allegations as true, thestate-law duty required the Manufacturers to use a differe...
The duty of pharmaceutical manufacturer's to warn users about potential adverse drug reactions is discussed. Topics include the scientific bases for testing for adverse drug interactions, drug products liability case law, what triggers duty to warn, and case law and adverse drug interactions.
A pain pump manufacturer has a post-sale duty to warn under state law, a U.S. District Court in Virginia has ruled. The plaintiff alleged he suffered injuries caused by the use of a "pain pump" to deliver pain medications following surgery. The plaintiff sued the defendants - who designed, manufactured and sold the device - for allegedly failing to provide adequate warnings that the pump was not safe to use.
Because these violations breached the standard of care established by Pennsylvania law, the court awarded plaintiffs damages both individually and on behalf of their children's estates.22 Finding that the district court properly exercised jurisdiction over this FTCA claim, the Third Circuit reviewed the findings of fact deferentially and the legal issues de novo.23 The Third Circuit looked to Pennsylvania statutes and common law to determine the standard of care for federal agencies under the FTCA.24 Moreover, the Third Circuit noted that if a state's highest court has not spoken on an issue, a federal court must predict how it would decide in light of: 1 holdings in related areas, 2 intermediate state court decisions, 3 federal cases interpreting state law, and 4 case law from other...
... like circumstances."3 A federal agency's duty under the FTCA stems from state law, which the Thi... claimed that the VA negligently failed to warn them about DeJesus's mental state.19 The district ...
Trial court did not err in relying on the unrefuted affidavit of the defendants registered surveyor in granting summary judgment to defendant. Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to defendant on plaintiffs personal injury claims based on her falling in a hole in the highway right-of-way abutting the defendants property. Under premises liability law, defendant had no duty to warn plaintiff of the hole because it lay outside his property lines and was not a dangerous defect. Defendant was not liable under the second and third exceptions to the general rule set forth in Eichorn v. Lustigs, Inc. (1954), 161 Ohio St. 11, because there was no evidence that he created or negligently maintained the hole, or used it for his own benefit. Judgmen...
A claim of failure to warn and instruct is a staple in product liability litigation. It is also a potentially dangerous claim because it is so easy to argue that adding a few words to the label or manual would have prevented the accident from happening. Therefore, when the law talks about the "duty to warn," it includes warnings on products in the form of warning labels; safety information in instructions; instructions that affirmatively describe how to use a product safely; and safety information in other means of communication such as videos, advertising, catalogs and Web sites. Once the decision has been made to warn, the manufacturer needs to determine whether the warning is adequate. The ANSI Z535 standards provide some good guidelines on creating warning labels and how to incorpor...
The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of defendants, the owner and occupier of retail premises, on plaintiff's negligence claim, arising out of injuries plaintiff sustained when she unknowingly walked off a step on defendants' premises. Because the hazard presented by the step was open and obvious as a matter of law, defendants had no duty to warn plaintiff of the step. Additionally, plaintiff failed to present evidence of sufficient attendant circumstances to avoid application of the open and obvious doctrine.
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
© Copyright 2013, vLex. All Rights Reserved.
Contents in vLex United States
Explore vLex
For Professionals
For Partners
Company
Other interesting searches:
Belpromstroibank O A O | Carlo Cardia | Signa Group, Inc. | Abdolghassem Mesbahi | Westhyp Finance B.V. | Bonos del tesoro | Despacho por medios ilícitos | olivetti france | confort thermique | maire de nantes
