Neef v. Redmon

How courts have described this case

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

• calling Cyr into question because risk spreading, a basis of Cyr decision, is not accepted as a rationale for strict liability in New Jersey; however, court did not reject continuity of enterprise exception
• calling Cyr into question because risk spreading, a basis of Cyr decision, is not accepted as a rationale for strict liability in New Jersey; however, court did not reject continuity of enterprise exception
• rejecting “product line” and “risk-spreading” theories of successor liability in products liability actions
• predicting Delaware law as to de facto merger in personal jurisdiction context
• \We limit the application of strict tort liability in this jurisdiction by continuing to emphasize that liability without negligence is not liability without fault\
• “We limit the application of strict tort liability in this jurisdiction by continuing to emphasize that liability without negligence is not liability without fault”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).