Kennedy v. Mobay Corp.
Marlene Cohen KENNEDY Et Al. v. MOBAY CORPORATION Et Al.
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
We granted certiorari to consider whether the Petitioners are entitled to a new trial (1) because the defense of sophisticated user should not have been presented in a strict liability case; (2) because the sophisticated user defense was impermissible under the facts of the case; and (3) because the jury instruction and reinstruction regarding the sophisticated user defense may have misled the jury.
After careful consideration of these issues, for reasons stated in the opinion of Chief Judge Wilner for the Court of Special Appeals in Kennedy v. Mobay, 84 Md.App. 397 , 579 A.2d 1191 (1990), the judgment is affirmed.
JUDGMENTS AFFIRMED, WITH COSTS.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(declining to reach “defensive cross-appeals” when this Court affirmed judgments entered in favor of defendants in a tort action)
Cited by 16 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Courts of Appeals1
- Federal District Courts2
- State Highest Courts3
- State Appellate Courts8
- State Trial Courts1
- Territorial Courts1
Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.