Bragg v. Hi-Ranger, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “under a negligence theory, the plaintiff bears the additional burden of demonstrating the defendant (seller or manufacturer
• explaining the level of care required for a seller or manufacturer under either a negligence or strict liability theory of a products liability case
• referring to these subparts as a “sophisticated user defense” and noting that this “defense has been adopted by numerous jurisdictions”
• affirming the trial court's directed verdict on a strict liability claim because the appellants failed to introduce any evidence of a\feasible design alter- native\
• stating “under a negligence theory, ... unlike strict liability, the focus is on the conduct of the seller or manufacturer, and liability is determined according to fault”
• requiring the plaintiff in any strict products liability case to show: (1) he was injured by the product; (2) the injury occurred because the product was in a defective condition, unreasonably dangerous to the user; and (3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).