Robert B. Grenier v. Vermont Log Buildings, Inc., Third-Party v. Dap, Inc. And Champion International Corp., Third-Party

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that, under Celotex, “it would take very little in the way of a negative averment at the summary judgment stage to require [the nonmovant who bears the burden of proof at trial] to identify its evidence”
• finding failure-to-warn claims preempted under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodentieide Act because plaintiff failed “to set forth a coherent specific claim” that was not based on the preempted realm of labeling or packaging
• finding failure-to-warn claims preempted under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act because plaintiff failed \to set forth a coherent specific claim\ that was not based on the preempted realm of labeling or packaging
• finding failure-to-warn claims preempted under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act because plaintiff failed \to set forth a coherent specific claim\ that was not based on the preempted realm of labeling or packaging
• “It was once an open question, but is now settled by the Supreme Court ... that ‘requirements’ ... presumptively includes state causes of action as well as laws and regulations.”
• “[I]t is now settled by the Supreme Court in Cipollone and [Medtronic ], that ‘requirements’ in this context presumptively includes state causes of action as well as laws and regulations.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).