Washington Supreme Court· 1/22/1987
George v. Parke-Davis
Citations
- 733 P.2d 507
- 107 Wash. 2d 584
- 1987 Wash. LEXIS 1040
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding manufacturers of DES liable to a woman born alive but injured in utero
- holding manufacturers of DES liable to a woman born alive but injured in utero
- discussing level of activity in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of a product a successor must engage in before they may be held liable under the product line exception
- in order to inhibit defendants from randomly impleading insolvent corporations to reduce their share of presumptive liability, defendants are required to establish the actual market share of impleaded defendants
- in order to inhibit defendants from randomly impleading insolvent corporations to reduce their share of presumptive liability, defendants are required to establish the actual market share of impleaded defendants
- “The product line [doctrine] requires the corporation to manufacture the same type of product, and not merely stay in the same type of manufacturing business.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dore, Pearson, Utter, Brachtenbach, Dolliver, Andersen, Callow, Goodloe, Durham
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
33 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Hymowitz v. Eli Lilly & Co.New York Court of Appeals· 1989-04-04· cited 207×
- Washburn v. Beatt Equipment Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1992-11-25· cited 188×
- Smith v. Eli Lilly & Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1990-10-01· cited 116×
- Green v. A.P.C.Washington Supreme Court· 1998-08-20· cited 111×
- Gaulding v. Celotex Corp.Texas Supreme Court· 1989-06-07· cited 104×
- Suzanne E. Tidler, and Helene Mankowitz v. Eli Lilly and CompanyD.C. Circuit· 1988-07-12· cited 88×
- City of Philadelphia v. Lead Industries Ass'nThird Circuit· 1993-05-11· cited 75×
- Conley v. Boyle Drug Co.Supreme Court of Florida· 1990-11-01· cited 66×
- Agency for Health Care v. Assoc. Indus.Supreme Court of Florida· 1996-06-27· cited 66×
- Smith v. Cutter Biological, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court· 1991-11-29· cited 41×
- Green v. APC (Am. Pharmaceutical Co.)Washington Supreme Court· 1998-08-20· cited 39×
- Parker v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1995-07-06· cited 35×
- City Of Philadelphia v. Lead Industries Association, Inc.Third Circuit· 1993-05-11· cited 33×
- White v. WeinerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-07-10· cited 25×
- Smith v. Eli Lilly & Co.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1988-05-25· cited 25×
- Shackil v. Lederle LaboratoriesNew Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1987-08-12· cited 22×
- Bond v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Co.Colorado Court of Appeals· 1993-07-22· cited 17×
- Farmex Inc. v. WainwrightSupreme Court of Georgia· 1998-06-29· cited 17×
- Santiago v. Sherwin-Williams Co.D. Massachusetts· 1992-01-13· cited 17×
- Butler v. Lamont School District No. 246Court of Appeals of Washington· 1987-11-19· cited 16×
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Ray v. Alad Corp.California Supreme Court· 1977-02-24· cited 396×
- Sindell v. Abbott LaboratoriesCalifornia Supreme Court· 1980-03-20· cited 373×
- Turner v. Bituminous Casualty Co.Michigan Supreme Court· 1976-08-26· cited 264×
- Martin v. Abbott LaboratoriesWashington Supreme Court· 1984-10-04· cited 160×
- Stanley Knapp, Jr. v. North American Rockwell Corporation v. Mrs. Smith's Pie Company, Third-Party-DefendantThird Circuit· 1974-12-27· cited 115×
- Meisel v. M & N Modern Hydraulic Press Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1982-05-27· cited 81×
- Hall v. Armstrong Cork, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1984-12-20· cited 59×
- Ladley v. Saint Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceWashington Supreme Court· 1968-05-29· cited 31×
Other cases named George v. Parke-Davis
1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.