(DOWNLOAD) "State Missouri Ex Rel. Deere and Company" by Supreme Court of Missouri En Banc ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State Missouri Ex Rel. Deere and Company
- Author : Supreme Court of Missouri En Banc
- Release Date : January 08, 1970
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 67 KB
Description
In this original proceeding, relators ask that we prohibit respondent circuit Judge from acting in a manner alleged to be
in excess of his jurisdiction. The challenge, specifically, is directed toward the court's order that relators answer certain
interrogatories, but it is based on relators' assertion that the "single act" longarm statutes of this state are unconstitutional.
Sections 351.633 and 506.500, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S. Relators, two foreign corporations unlicensed in this state, were, with others, named as defendants in a suit filed in Barry
County for damages resulting from personal injuries suffered by plaintiff. The petition alleged that plaintiff owned a 1956
Model 420 John Deere tractor; that he purchased from a local implement dealer a fuel tank cap, part number AF2914R, for said
tractor; that neither the gas tank nor cap were vented; that on the first occasion he used the tractor with the new fuel tank
cap, gasoline was thrown on him causing severe burns and permanent disabling injuries. In addition to the local dealer, two
corporations licensed in this state under names including the words "John Deere," as well as the two relators, were named
as defendants. It was alleged that relator, Deere and Company, a Delaware corporation, was the parent company with all but
the local dealer being controlled subsidiary corporations. In Count I, allegations were made that relators were engaged in
the manufacture, design, testing, distribution, sale and servicing of John Deere tractors and parts, and while so doing used
"national channels of commerce" for distribution; that defendants placed such equipment on the market when "said tractor and
fuel tank cap were not reasonably fit for the general purpose for which they were designed ... and were in a defective, unsafe
and imminently dangerous condition"; that plaintiff was using said products in a manner which was reasonably foreseeable;
and, that such defects were the proximate cause of the injuries suffered. See Keener v. Dayton Electric Mfg. Co., 445 S.W.2d
362, 364, wherein this court declared: "We now adopt the rule of strict liability in tort stated in 2 Restatement, Law of
Torts, Second, § 402A ..." In Count II, on a theory of negligence, it was alleged that the corporate defendants
were negligent in manufacturing and distributing a tractor without a "vented" gas tank and designing and selling "unvented"
fuel tank caps; and further, that they negligently failed to warn implement dealers of this fact. Counts III and IV by the
wife for loss of consortium were premised, respectively, on the same theories.