TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bill Loyd HARBER; Lucinda Earlene Harber v. ALTEC INDUSTRIES, INC.

prod.liab.rep.(cch)p 13,631 Bill Loyd Harber Lucinda Earlene Harber v. Altec Industries, Inc.

Bill Loyd HARBER v. Altec Indus., 5 F.3d 339 (8th Cir. 1993)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
September 22, 1993
Docket
No. 93-1712
Judges
Fagg, Bowman, Loken
Citations
5 F.3d 3391993 U.S. App. LEXIS 24251

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Bill Loyd Harber bought a used utility truck with an aerial lift bucket from Altec Industries, Inc., a used goods dealer. Altec sold the truck to Harber “as is” and disclaimed all warranties in the sales contract. While Harber was working in the elevated bucket four months after buying the truck, the bucket detached from the truck’s derrick arm and fell to the ground, injuring Harber. Harber and his spouse then brought this action alleging Altec was strictly liable for Harber’s injuries resulting from the bucket’s hidden defect, even though Altec did not design or manufacture the bucket, nor inspect, repair, or modify the equipment before its sale.

Altec moved for summary judgment asserting Altec could not be held strictly liable for the latent product defect under Missouri law. The district court granted Altec’s motion.

Harber v. Altec Indus., Inc., 812 F.Supp. 954 (W.D.Mo.1993). Because Missouri has not decided whether the doctrine of strict liability applies to a seller of used goods, the district court attempted to predict whether the Missouri Supreme Court would extend the strict liability doctrine to Altec. After reviewing cases from other states and analyzing whether the policy reasons underlying strict liability would be furthered if applied to sellers of used goods like Altec, the district court concluded “the Missouri Supreme Court would not extend strict liability to include ... sellers of used goods who perform no maintenance, modification or repair on the used product and who successfully disclaim all warranties of title.”

Id.

at 965-66 .

The Harbers appeal, suggesting we should certify the question to the Missouri Supreme Court. Although a Missouri statute provides we may certify unanswered questions of Missouri law to the Missouri Supreme Court, Mo.Stat.Ann. § 477.004 (Vernon Supp.1993), the Missouri Supreme Court has declined to answer our certified questions, holding the Missouri Constitution did not grant the court original jurisdiction to render opinions on questions of Missouri law certified by federal courts.

Zeman v. V.F. Factory Outlet, Inc., 911 F.2d 107, 108-09 (8th Cir.1990). Like the district court, we are left to predict the Missouri Supreme Court’s answer to the question this case presents.

Having reviewed the issue de novo, paying particular attention to the Missouri law cited by the Harbers, we agree with the district court that the Missouri Supreme Court would not hold Altec strictly liable under the circumstances. We affirm on the basis of the district court’s well-reasoned opinion.

See 8th Cir.R. 47B.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 12 cases

View all citing references →
1994: 11995: 21996: 11997: 11999: 12001: 12004: 12019: 22020: 12021: 119942026peak 1995 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Gonzalez v. Rutherford Corp.881 F. Supp. 829 (E.D.N.Y. 1995)
  2. Charter Oil Company v. American Employers' Insurance Company69 F.3d 1160 (D.C. Cir. 1995)
  3. prod.liab.rep. (Cch) P 14,943 David King v. Damiron Corporation113 F.3d 93 (7th Cir. 1997)
  4. Allenberg v. Bentley Hedges Travel Serv. Inc.2001 OK 22, 22 P.3d 223
  5. Frey v. Harley Davidson Motor Co., Inc.734 A.2d 1 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1999)
  6. Engel v. Corrigan Co.-Mechanical Contractors, Inc.148 S.W.3d 28 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004)

Most recent

  1. (PS) Wise v. HortonNo. 2:21-cv-00015 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2021)
  2. (PS) Dmitriy v. BellaNo. 2:20-cv-00010 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 16, 2020)
  3. (PS)Alfaro Brittany v. RoanasiosNo. 2:19-cv-02064 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2019)
  4. (PS) Iegorova v. FeyganNo. 2:19-cv-01512 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2019)
  5. Engel v. Corrigan Co.-Mechanical Contractors, Inc.148 S.W.3d 28 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004)
  6. Allenberg v. Bentley Hedges Travel Serv. Inc.2001 OK 22, 22 P.3d 223

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.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Harber v. Altec Indus., 812 F. Supp. 954 (W.D. Mo. 1993) 6
Molly Zeman v. V.F. Factory Outlet, Inc., 911 F.2d 107 (8th Cir. 1990) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list