Stewart v. Budget Rent-A-Car Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, given the relatively unused condition of the car, there was sufficient evidence to withstand a directed verdict in favor of the manufacturer and distributor
• insisting on “proof that the product was in some way defective and that the damages were caused by the defect” (emphasis added)
• recognizing the significance of “control” in strict products liability
• “[I]t is the modem trend and the better reasoned view that strict liability in tort is a sound legal basis for recovery in products liability cases.”
• merely deciding that “there was sufficient evidence” to go to the jury on whether the product was defective when it left the hands of the manufacturer and distributor
• testimony of witness to events surrounding accident sufficient to allow inference of defect

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).