Abella Owners’ Ass’n v. MI Windows & Doors Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 001-140-17, 17 pp.) (Niemeyer, J.) No. 16-1146, June 20, 2017; USDC at Charleston, S.C. (Norton, J.) 4th Cir. Holding: An owners’ association that did not opt out of ...

Tagged with: Product Liability

Allstate Insurance Co. v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-139-17, 12 pp.) (R. Bryan Harwell, J.) 4:16-cv-03666; D.S.C. Holding: The court predicts that the South Carolina Supreme Court would hold that punitive damages are not available to insurance ...

Tagged with: Product Liability

Shami v. Kroger Co. (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-230-16, 16 pp.) (Cameron McGowan Currie, J.) 3:15-cv-03843; D.S.C. Holding: In response to defendants’ summary judgment motion, plaintiff has raised concerns about his medications’ effects on his ability to testify at his deposition. ...

Tagged with: Product Liability

Marshall v. Lowe’s Home Centers (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-148-16, 61 pp.) (R. Bryan Harwell, J.) 4:14-cv-04585; D.S.C. Holding: Even though neither of plaintiff’s two experts was qualified on his own to explain every aspect of the problems with the design ...

Tagged with: Product Liability

Stieglitz v. Stryker Corp. (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-003-16, 9 pp.) (Patrick Michael Duffy, J.) 2:15-cv-01680; D.S.C. Holding: In her proposed amended complaint, plaintiff has sufficiently alleged that her injury occurred because defendant’s product was in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous ...

Tagged with: Product Liability

A South Carolina law firm has played a prominent role in a series of product liability lawsuits against the nation’s largest manufacturer of red-plastic gas cans and stands to collect millions of dollars through pending litigation.

Tagged with: Product Liability

Tang v. Synutra Int’l Inc. Chinese citizens and residents who allege injury from melamine-contaminated infant formula may not sue a Chinese subsidiary of a company incorporated in Maryland in a Maryland federal court; the 4th Circuit says China is an available, adequate and more convenient forum to redress the plaintiffs’ grievances, and it affirms the district court’s dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds.

Tagged with: Civil Practice Forum Non Conveniens Product Liability

5 Star, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co. Where plaintiff alleged that defendant negligently designed the speed control deactivation switch in plaintiff’s pickup truck, but where plaintiff presented no expert testimony as to the design of the switch or as to defendant’s conduct when it designed the switch, plaintiff failed to prove negligent design. We reverse the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion for a directed verdict.

Tagged with: Product Liability Tort/Negligence