Ramstad v. Lear Siegler Diversified Holdings Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting the post-sale duty to warn because, among other reasons, the manufacturer had not undertaken a duty to warn
• no post-sale duty to warn where manufacturer “had notice of only a handful of other accidents”
• “Per diem arguments advise the jury to quantify pain and suffering by affixing an amount of damages to each hour or day and multiplying that amount by the number of hours or days left in a plaintiff’s life.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).