Exner Sand & Gravel Corp. v. Gallagher Bros. Sand & Gravel Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that \[an automobile] manufacturer is not required to produce an accident-proof vehicle\ under New Jersey law
• finding that Plaintiff could not meet its burden of proof as to what injuries, if any, would have resulted if the alternative, safer head restraint design been used by merely offering testimony that the alternative design would have made the crash “survivable”
• “This appeal requires us to predict how the New Jersey Supreme Court would react when presented with novel and difficult questions of tort law.”
• \This appeal requires us to predict how the New Jersey Supreme Court would react when presented with novel and difficult questions of tort law.\
• \This appeal requires us to predict how the New Jersey Supreme Court would react when presented with novel and difficult questions of tort law.\
• “As a rule the mere occurrence of an accident is not sufficient to establish that the product was not fit for ordinary purposes.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).