Schuver 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.

• holding that where a state statute conflicts with a federal statute, the state statute is preempted and the federal statute prevails by virtue of the Supremacy Clause
• holding that FIFRA preempted strict liability and negligent marketing, testing, notification and sale claims that were merely another way of arguing that the product's labels should have warned against use in a certain locale
• noting that there was no evidence in the record that Preview was in a defective condition or unreasonably dangerous
• strict liability claim was challenge to adequacy of label and thus was preempted under FIFRA
• “These allegations of negligence rest upon an alleged improper or inadequate testing or marketing claim. We think this is merely another way of arguing that DuPont’s labels should have warned against using [the product] in O’Brien County.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).