Pemberton v. American Distilled Spirits Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the grain alcohol is not a defective product and there was no need to warn about the dangers of the alcohol because the danger of alcohol poisoning is well known by the public
• manufacturer of alcoholic beverage had no duty to warn of dangers resulting from consumption of product because risks are within common knowledge of ordinary consumer
• seller of 100% grain alcohol had no duty to warn customer of the effects of consuming a large quantity of it in undiluted form

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).