liability in tort is concerned doctrine (Connecticut) · Go Syfert
← Connecticut issues

liability in tort is concerned doctrine in Connecticut

8 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1985–2000 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Connecticut 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Giglio v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.green
conn · 1980 · cited in 3 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1985–1998
2 sentences

1998"The doctrine of strict liability in tort is concerned with the character of the product injected into the stream of commerce, not with the specific conduct of the defendant." Wagner v. Clark Equipment , supra, 243 Conn. 195 ; see also Giglio v. Connecticut Light Power Co. , 180 Conn. 230 , 234 , 429 A.2d 486 (1980).

1998"The doctrine of strict liability in tort is concerned with the character of the product injected into the stream of commerce, not with the specific conduct of the defendant." Wagner v. Clark Equipment , supra, 243 Conn. 195 ; see also Giglio v. Connecticut Light Power Co. , 180 Conn. 230 , 234 , 429 A.2d 486 (1980).

13

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
Sanderson v. Steve Snyder Enterprises, Inc. green
conn · 1985
2 sentences

1996Because "the doctrine of strict liability in tort is concerned with the character of the product injected into the stream of commerce, not with the specific conduct of the defendant", Sanderson v. Steve Snyder Enterprises, Inc. 196 Conn. 134 , 137 , 491 A.2d 389 (1985), the CT Page 4034-PP state of the art defense is inappropriate to the extent that a claim is based on strict liability.

1996Because "the doctrine of strict liability in tort is concerned with the character of the product injected into the stream of commerce, not with the specific conduct of the defendant", Sanderson v. Steve Snyder Enterprises, Inc. 196 Conn. 134 , 137 , 491 A.2d 389 (1985), the CT Page 4034-PP state of the art defense is inappropriate to the extent that a claim is based on strict liability.

31986–1996
Wagner v. Clark Equipment Co. green
conn · 1997
2 sentences

2000"The doctrine of strict liability in tort is concerned with the character of the product injected into the stream of commerce, not with the specific conduct of the defendant." Id., 195 .

2000"The doctrine of strict liability in tort is concerned with the character of the product injected into the stream of commerce, not with the specific conduct of the defendant." Wagner, 243 Conn. at 195 .

22000–2000
Hall v. Burns green
conn · 1990
2 sentences

1993Halls v. Burns, 213 Conn. 446 , 461 , 596 A.2d 10 (1990). "`The doctrine of strict liability in tort is concerned with the character of the product injected into the stream of commerce, not with the specific conduct of the defendant.'" Id., quoting Sanderson v. Steve Snyder Enterprises, Inc., 196 Conn. 134 , 147 491 A.2d 389 (1985).

1992"The doctrine of strict liability in tort is concerned with the character of the product injected into the stream of commerce not with the specific conduct of the defendant." Hall v. Burns, 213 Conn. 446 , 461 (1990); Giglio v. Connecticut Light and Power Co., 180 Conn. 230 , 234 (1980).

21992–1993

Where else courts name it

CT 8 (1985–2000) NJ 2 (1968–1968)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check