Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 California opinions name it 3 courts 2013–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Loranger v. Jonesgreen1 sentence2013(Loranger v. Jones (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 847, 858, fn. 9 (Loranger).) 7 Declarations by several defendants and by the daughter of the O’Neil defendants showed the Hosses were not in the room during the meeting where Chittock displayed and distributed copies of the relevant map. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
O'NEIL v. Crane Co.
green
2 sentences2017As we explained, "[t]here is no reason to think a product manufacturer will be able to exert any control over the **50 safety of *195 replacement parts or companion products made by other companies." ( O'Neil , supra , 53 Cal.4th at p. 365 , 135 Cal.Rptr.3d 288 , 266 P.3d 987 .) The O'Neil rule is consistent with the Restatement of Torts, which advocates liability for post-sale failure to warn only if the seller has the ability to identify and communicate effectively with those at risk. ( Rest.3d Torts, Products Liability, § 10.) When a drug manufacturer acquires a new product line, it assumes 2017As we explained, "[t]here is no reason to think a product manufacturer will be able to exert any control over the **50 safety of *195 replacement parts or companion products made by other companies." ( O'Neil , supra , 53 Cal.4th at p. 365 , 135 Cal.Rptr.3d 288 , 266 P.3d 987 .) The O'Neil rule is consistent with the Restatement of Torts, which advocates liability for post-sale failure to warn only if the seller has the ability to identify and communicate effectively with those at risk. ( Rest.3d Torts, Products Liability, § 10.) When a drug manufacturer acquires a new product line, it assumes | 5 | 2016–2017 |
Knox v. Dean II
green
2 sentences2016III Fraud Causes of Action "The elements of fraud are (1) the defendant made a false representation as to a past or existing material fact; (2) the defendant knew the representation was false at the time it was made; (3) in making the representation, the defendant intended to deceive the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the representation; and (5) the plaintiff suffered resulting damages. [Citation.] The elements of negligent misrepresentation are the same except for the second element, which for negligent misrepresentation is the defendant made the representation without rea 2016III Fraud Causes of Action "The elements of fraud are (1) the defendant made a false representation as to a past or existing material fact; (2) the defendant knew the representation was false at the time it was made; (3) in making the representation, the defendant intended to deceive the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the representation; and (5) the plaintiff suffered resulting damages. [Citation.] The elements of negligent misrepresentation are the same except for the second element, which for negligent misrepresentation is the defendant made the representation without rea | 3 | 2016–2016 |
West v. JPMorgan Chase Bank
green
2 sentences2016III Fraud Causes of Action "The elements of fraud are (1) the defendant made a false representation as to a past or existing material fact; (2) the defendant knew the representation was false at the time it was made; (3) in making the representation, the defendant intended to deceive the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the representation; and (5) the plaintiff suffered resulting damages. [Citation.] The elements of negligent misrepresentation are the same except for the second element, which for negligent misrepresentation is the defendant made the representation without rea 2016III Fraud Causes of Action "The elements of fraud are (1) the defendant made a false representation as to a past or existing material fact; (2) the defendant knew the representation was false at the time it was made; (3) in making the representation, the defendant intended to deceive the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the representation; and (5) the plaintiff suffered resulting damages. [Citation.] The elements of negligent misrepresentation are the same except for the second element, which for negligent misrepresentation is the defendant made the representation without rea | 3 | 2016–2016 |
Small v. Fritz Companies, Inc.
green
2 sentences2016III Fraud Causes of Action "The elements of fraud are (1) the defendant made a false representation as to a past or existing material fact; (2) the defendant knew the representation was false at the time it was made; (3) in making the representation, the defendant intended to deceive the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the representation; and (5) the plaintiff suffered resulting damages. [Citation.] The elements of negligent misrepresentation are the same except for the second element, which for negligent misrepresentation is the defendant made the representation without rea 2016III Fraud Causes of Action "The elements of fraud are (1) the defendant made a false representation as to a past or existing material fact; (2) the defendant knew the representation was false at the time it was made; (3) in making the representation, the defendant intended to deceive the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the representation; and (5) the plaintiff suffered resulting damages. [Citation.] The elements of negligent misrepresentation are the same except for the second element, which for negligent misrepresentation is the defendant made the representation without rea | 3 | 2016–2016 |
Harris v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2017(See Webb v. Special Electric Co., Inc. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 167 , 191, 202 Cal.Rptr.3d 460 , 370 P.3d 1022 ; Harris v. Johnson (1916) 174 Cal. 55 , 58, 161 P. 1155 .) The majority's foreseeability analysis glosses over this important legal obligation, noting that the successor would have no financial incentive to make a labeling change. 2017(See Webb v. Special Electric Co., Inc. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 167 , 191, 202 Cal.Rptr.3d 460 , 370 P.3d 1022 ; Harris v. Johnson (1916) 174 Cal. 55 , 58, 161 P. 1155 .) The majority's foreseeability analysis glosses over this important legal obligation, noting that the successor would have no financial incentive to make a labeling change. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Webb v. Special Electric Co., Inc.
green
2 sentences2017(See Webb v. Special Electric Co., Inc. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 167 , 191, 202 Cal.Rptr.3d 460 , 370 P.3d 1022 ; Harris v. Johnson (1916) 174 Cal. 55 , 58, 161 P. 1155 .) The majority's foreseeability analysis glosses over this important legal obligation, noting that the successor would have no financial incentive to make a labeling change. 2017(See Webb v. Special Electric Co., Inc. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 167 , 191, 202 Cal.Rptr.3d 460 , 370 P.3d 1022 ; Harris v. Johnson (1916) 174 Cal. 55 , 58, 161 P. 1155 .) The majority's foreseeability analysis glosses over this important legal obligation, noting that the successor would have no financial incentive to make a labeling change. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Conte v. Wyeth, Inc.
green
2 sentences2016III Fraud Causes of Action "The elements of fraud are (1) the defendant made a false representation as to a past or existing material fact; (2) the defendant knew the representation was false at the time it was made; (3) in making the representation, the defendant intended to deceive the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the representation; and (5) the plaintiff suffered resulting damages. [Citation.] The elements of negligent misrepresentation are the same except for the second element, which for negligent misrepresentation is the defendant made the representation without rea 2016III Fraud Causes of Action "The elements of fraud are (1) the defendant made a false representation as to a past or existing material fact; (2) the defendant knew the representation was false at the time it was made; (3) in making the representation, the defendant intended to deceive the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the representation; and (5) the plaintiff suffered resulting damages. [Citation.] The elements of negligent misrepresentation are the same except for the second element, which for negligent misrepresentation is the defendant made the representation without rea | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.