Parker v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he adequacy of a warning does not become a material, factual issue until it is first determined that a duty to warn exists.”
• explicitly holding only that Du Pont Co. “owed no duty” to warn the ultimate users
• manufacturer of non-defective product has no duty to test suitability of another’s finished product which is assembled from several different components
• “Du Pont argued that Vitek was a sophisticated purchaser with extensive knowledge .... ”
• “Du Pont owed no duty to Plaintiffs for supplying Vitek with an inert material”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).