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.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 15 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Estrada v. Berkel Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Estrada v. Berkel Inc. Anchor | green | “where liability is predicated on a failure to warn, new york views negligence and strict liability claims as equivalent.” | 6 |
| 2 | Amos v. Biogen Idec Inc. | green | “a plaintiff alleging negligent misrepresentation must establish reliance upon a false statement or material misrepresentation or omission, and the learned intermediary rule eliminates the possibility of any such reliance.” | 5 |
| 3 | Porrazzo v. Bumble Bee Foods, LLC | green | “to establish that a product is defective for purposes of a breach of implied warranty of merchantability claim, a plaintiff must show that the product was not reasonably fit for its intended purpose, an inquiry that focuses on the expectations for the performance of the product …” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.