Shell Oil Co. v. Gutierrez

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting manufacturer’s argument that inadequate labelling was not cause of injury because user did not read the warning given; jury could have concluded that label was too small and that larger, more conspicuous label would have been seen, read and heeded
• “The determination as to whether the supplier’s duty measured by these considerations has been reasonably discharged comes within the function of the trier of fact.”
• whether product is defective because of a failure to warn depends upon the negligence standards of foreseeability, seriousness, and cost of preventing
• whether product is defective because of a failure to warn depends upon the negligence standards of foreseeability, seriousness, and cost of preventing
• “Lack of access to the final form in which the product reaches the user is simply one of the considerations bearing upon the existence and extent of duty.”
• \determination as to whether the supplier's duty . . . has been reasonably discharge[d] comes within the function of the trier of fact.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).