WebThe leading case on the duty to warn, Campos v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 98 N.J. 198, 485 A.2d 305 (1984), predates the PLA. In Campos, the Supreme Court observed that a manufacturer clearly had a duty to warn against “all hidden or latent dangers that would arise out of a reasonably anticipated use of its product.” WebIn Stewart v. 104 Wallace St., Inc., 87 N.J. 146, 149 (1981), the New Jersey Supreme Court modified the law solely as to commercial landowners, holding that such owners could be liable for injuries sustained on sidewalks adjacent to their properties. The Court explicitly limited its holding in Stewart
MYRLAK v. John Doe 1-5, Doe Company 1-5 and Doe …
WebFeb 13, 1998 · The court asked CSX to distinguish Fanetti v. Hellenic Lines Ltd., 2 which holds that "to take advantage of the after-tax principle, a defendant must invoke it in timely and proper fashion" by offering "evidence to establish what amount of future taxes plaintiff would have incurred." 3 CSX conceded it had no authority contrary to Fanetti. WebJOHN MYRLAK V. PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK ET ALS Annotate this Case (NOTE: This decision was approved by the court for publication.) This case can also be found at … poncho man with no name
Housing Choice Voucher – Inlivian
Webproduct test" in Myrlak v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, 157 N.J. 84, 103-07 (1999). This court also adopted section 16 of the Third Restatement of Products Liability in Green v ... WebJan 21, 2004 · Myrlak v. Port Authority, 157 N.J. 84, 97 (1999). Based on our well-established case law in this area, a plaintiff must prove that the product was defective, that the defect existed when the product left the manufacturer s control, and that the defect proximately caused injuries to the plaintiff, a reasonably foreseeable or intended user. [Ibid.] WebMyrlak v. Port Authority, 302 N.J. Super. 1, 694 A.2d 575 (1997) State v. Wilmouth, 302 N.J. Super. 20, 694 A.2d 584 (1997) Ramos v. M & F Fashions, Inc., 302 N.J. Super. 24, 694 … shanta nelson