Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

England v. Chrysler Corp.

Eng. v. Chrysler Corp., 419 U.S. 869 (1974)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1974-10-15
Topic
general

holding that each manufacturer who contributed in anyway, and at any time, to a claimant's bodily injury is fully liable for all the resulting damages | holding asbestos manufacturers jointly and severally liable for asbestos related diseases that were caused, in part, by its products | asbestosis; disease does not ordinarily manifest itself until "ten to twenty-five or more years after exposure" | failure to give complete disclosure of the existence and extent of risk involved in use of product deprived product of comment k exemption | though requested relief declaratory only, granting of such would interfere with discretionary functions of state judges whose decision would, in effect, be reversed | asbestosis; disease does not ordinarily manifest itself until “ten to twenty-five years or more after exposure” | asbestosis; disease does not ordinarily manifest itself until "ten to twenty-five or more years after exposure" | asbestosis; disease does not generally manifest itself until “ten to twenty-five or more years after exposure” | “the advantaged and disadvantaged parties must be shown to be competing customers ... in order for there to be discrimination” | "Whether the defendant's conduct was a substantial factor is a question for the jury, unless the court determines that reasonable men could not differ.” | jury specifically found that “Unibestos” was defective but returned a verdict in favor of Pittsburgh-Corning since plaintiff’s claim was time-barred. | strict liability action where the court stated that “[t]he requirement that the danger be reasonably foreseeable, or scientifically discoverable, is an important limitation of the seller’s liability” | asbestosis; disease does not ordinarily manifest itself until “ten to twenty-five or more years after exposure” | in a friction products asbestos case, the court noted that it was impossible as a practical matter to determine which of multiple exposures resulted in injury, and allowed plaintiff to present a cumulative exposure causation theory | tracing history of medical knowledge of asbestos-related occupational diseases | tracing history of medical knowledge of asbestos-related occupational diseases | state department of highways not a person | state department of highways not a person | negligent failure to warn of danger | state department of pollution control

Citator

Cited by
169 opinions

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.