General Motors Corp. v. Harper

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding a test constituted no evidence that an alternative design for seat-belt webbing would protect a driver from the principal risk of impacting a steering wheel when test did not involve steering wheels or steering columns
• reversing plaintiffs jury award in products liability seat belt restraint suit because design expert’s testimony failed to establish causation
• concluding a test constituted no evidence that an alternative design for seat-belt webbing would protect a driver from the principal risk of impacting a steering wheel when test did not involve steering wheels or steering columns
• reversing plaintiff’s jury award in products liability seat belt restraint suit because design expert’s testimony failed to establish causation
• A Unsupported statements that an alternative design would be safer is not evidence. @
• “When part of a document contains hearsay and part of it is admissible, the objection should point out the statements claimed to be hearsay and specifically object to those statements.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).