Betty Jo Chase and Charles M. Chase v. General Motors Corporation, and B & M Chevrolet-Cadillac Corporation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding pre-accident, postmanufacture design changes not within the ambit of 407 and explaining they may be otherwise admissible
• excluding evidence of a recall occurring subsequent to the plaintiff’s accident, but declining to exclude evidence of a change in design occurring after the plaintiff purchased the product but before the plaintiff’s injuries
• raising claim related to an amendment of the plan that 21 decreased benefits
• Trial judge's use of 407 to exclude evidence of change in brake design that occurred after manufacture and sale of allegedly defective vehicle but before accident was improper.
• Trial judge’s use of 407 to exclude evidence of change in brake design that occurred after manufacture and sale of allegedly defective vehicle but before accident was improper.
• “A party, not the district court, bears the burden of 22 keeping the court apprised of any changes in his mailing address.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).