Skip to main content

Smith v. Smith

Citations

  • 278 N.W.2d 155
  • 1979 S.D. LEXIS 209

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 plaintiff’s or the defendant’s negligence is irrelevant and contributory negligence is not a defense in strict liability”
  • holding that, due to the unique nature of strict liability and breach of warranty actions where the conduct of the manufacturer is irrelevant in determining liability, it would be “inconsistent to hold that the user’s negligence is material when the seller’s is not”
  • adopting § 402A in toto, nothing that plaintiff must prove that the defective product is unreasonably dangerous
  • under § 402A, burden on plaintiff to prove \a defect which is unreasonably dangerous\
  • principal purpose behind strict products liability is to protect public
  • recognition of assumption of the risk and misuse as defenses

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Dunn, Henderson, Wollman, Fosheim, Braithwaite, Morgan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

42 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.