Washington Supreme Court· 10/20/1977
Teagle v. Fischer & Porter Co.
Citations
- 570 P.2d 438
- 89 Wash. 2d 149
- 1977 Wash. LEXIS 983
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- decided under strict liability theory of § 402A, but referring to manufacturer's \duty to warn\ users
- decided under strict liability theory of § 402A, but referring to manufacturer’s “duty to warn” users
- plaintiff injured while using defendant’s prod uct when “Viton O-ring,” not manufactured by defendant, failed
- instruction as to a regulation requiring protective eyewear when eye injuries are probable is appropriate if evidence demonstrates plaintiff was aware of a probability of injury
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Hamilton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
49 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Suter v. San Angelo Foundry & MacHine CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey· 1979-07-31· cited 358×
- Seattle-First National Bank v. Shoreline Concrete Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1978-12-28· cited 151×
- Terhune v. A. H. Robins Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1978-04-27· cited 139×
- Norwilton Murray v. Fairbanks Morse, Beloit Power Systems, Inc., in No. 78-2224. Cross Appeal of Norwilton Murray, in No. 78-2225Third Circuit· 1979-11-29· cited 122×
- Baughn v. Honda Motor Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1986-11-06· cited 109×
- Dura Corp. v. HarnedAlaska Supreme Court· 1985-07-19· cited 99×
- Fahn v. Cowlitz CountyWashington Supreme Court· 1981-01-20· cited 95×
- Gammon v. Clark Equipment Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1985-10-17· cited 95×
- Turner v. KohlerCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1989-07-10· cited 84×
- Haysom v. Coleman Lantern Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1978-01-12· cited 78×
- Macias v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 2012-08-09· cited 77×
- Little v. PPG Industries, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1979-05-10· cited 75×
- Simonetta v. Viad Corp.Washington Supreme Court· 2008-12-11· cited 68×
- Braaten v. Saberhagen HoldingsWashington Supreme Court· 2008-12-11· cited 61×
- Campbell v. ITE Imperial Corp.Washington Supreme Court· 1987-03-12· cited 57×
- Estate of Ryder v. Kelly-Springfield Tire Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1978-11-30· cited 53×
- Lenhardt v. Ford Motor CompanyWashington Supreme Court· 1984-07-05· cited 51×
- Montero Saldaña v. American Motors Corp.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1978-05-31· cited 46×
- Anderson v. Dreis & Krump Manufacturing Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington· 1987-07-09· cited 43×
- Parrillo v. Giroux Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Rhode Island· 1981-03-11· cited 42×
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- West v. Caterpillar Tractor Company, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida· 1976-07-21· cited 382×
- Seattle-First National Bank v. TabertWashington Supreme Court· 1975-11-26· cited 151×
- Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1969-03-20· cited 144×
- Preston v. DuncanWashington Supreme Court· 1960-02-25· cited 113×
- Canifax v. Hercules Powder Co.California Court of Appeal· 1965-09-08· cited 107×
- Rindlisbaker v. WilsonIdaho Supreme Court· 1974-02-11· cited 73×
- Lyons v. Redding Construction Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1973-11-08· cited 55×
- Wilber Development Corp. v. Les Rowland Constr., Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1974-06-13· cited 51×
- Sun Valley Airlines, Inc. v. Avco-Lycoming Corp.D. Idaho· 1976-04-06· cited 51×
- Hagenbuch v. Snap-On Tools Corp.D. New Hampshire· 1972-03-02· cited 46×
- Haugen v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals of Washington· 1976-04-22· cited 45×
- Powers v. Hunt-Wesson Foods, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court· 1974-06-28· cited 42×
- CAPITOL HILL METH. CH. OF SEATTLE v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court· 1958-05-09· cited 39×
- Helicoid Gage Division of American Chain & Cable Co. v. HowellCourt of Appeals of Texas· 1974-06-26· cited 27×
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.