Search for: ""duty to warn"" Results 761 - 780 of 1,332
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Sep 2016, 1:17 pm by Karsner & Meehan, P.C.
By law, a manufacturer of a product with known dangers has a duty to warn consumers who will foreseeably come in contact with the product and be subjected to those dangers. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 12:11 pm by Mike Danko
In short, the Court ruled that while a manufacture has a duty to warn the user about the dangers of a product and how to avoid injury, it does not have a duty to train the user. [read post]
2 Jan 2020, 8:00 am by blackfin
These establishments also have a duty to warn about defective conditions – or to repair those unsafe and hazardous conditions within a reasonable period of time. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 7:30 am by Friedman, Rodman & Frank, P.A.
The court also affirmed the lower court’s decision regarding the plaintiff’s failure-to-warn claim, reasoning that there is no duty to warn of an open and obvious hazard. [read post]
11 Jun 2020, 6:15 pm by Foran & Foran, P.A.
 However, an employer or premises owner can discharge their duty to warn employees of an independent contractor by notifying the independent contractor or his supervisory employees of the latent danger. [read post]
9 Jul 2020, 4:00 am by Brian
Drug manufacturers have a legal and ethical duty to warn patients about potential risks and to remove drugs from the market/not place them on the market if they are harmful. [read post]
25 Feb 2016, 7:32 am by Allred & Allred
They also have a duty to warn of known (or reasonably knowable) side effects of a certain drug. [read post]
1 Nov 2018, 7:22 am by Friedman, Rodman & Frank, P.A.
The defendant argued that the arrangement was similar to a landlord/tenant arrangement, and thus they owed her “no duty of care to maintain or repair the premises and no duty to warn of a dangerous condition on the premises unless they knew of a dangerous condition that was not open and obvious. [read post]
6 May 2015, 2:21 pm by Jeffrey P. Gale, P.A.
Every premises liability case analysis involving invitees begins here: “Generally, a property owner owes two duties to an invitee: (1) the duty to use reasonable care in maintaining the property in a reasonably safe condition; and (2) the duty to warn of latent or concealed dangers which are or should be known to the owner and which are unknown to the invitee and cannot be discovered through the exercise of due care. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 7:41 pm by Brad Pauley
  It held the defendant manufacturer owed the plaintiff no duty to warn about the dangers arising from asbestos-containing products used with its machines, and likewise owed no duty to prevent the resulting asbestos-related harm. [read post]
29 Jan 2014, 6:36 pm by Dr. Shezad Malik
The jury found that the manufacturer did fail in its duty to warn the public about the potential cancer risks of body powder, but determined that the product was not defective without the warning and found that Johnson & Johnson was not liable for Berg’s ovarian cancer. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 6:27 pm by Glotzer & Sweat
Legal Issues Presented: The main issue to be decided was whether the school psychologist had a duty to warn Tarasoff that threats had been made against her life by the patient. [read post]
24 Dec 2010, 8:06 pm by lawmrh
The appeals court said the duty to warn only arises “to other persons within the foreseeable ambit of danger. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 1:09 pm
" Owners owe the highest duty of care to invitees: a duty to warn about hazards on the land that the owner knows about or should know about. [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 9:12 am by Law Office of Michael D. Maurer, P.A.
The appellate court explained that although property owners are supposed to use reasonable care for those they invite onto the property, there isn’t a duty to warn against dangers that are actually known about or that are obvious. [read post]
10 Jun 2015, 6:34 pm by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman
As part of the split, some courts were not willing to hold a manufacturer liable for injury caused by a product they didn’t manufacture, and that they had no duty to warn potential victims of the safety risks posed by these aftermarket products. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 9:28 am
However, just as tobacco manufacturers are required to provide information about health risks on their packaging, manufacturers of other potentially dangerous products have a duty to warn consumers that the product could harm them. [read post]
1 Oct 2010, 1:41 pm by Cicely Wilson
Citizen’s United P.L. 111-148 347 U.S. 483 “duty to warn” We hope this brief tutorial has been helpful! [read post]