Summary judgment will be granted to a defendant that establishes that it was not a successor in interest to a company that manufactured the alleged defective product. Ingalls et al, v. Viacom, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 04-1454, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Nov. 8, 2004.

Plaintiffs filed a product liability action after suffering an injury by a product allegedly manufactured by the defendants. The defendants moved for summary judgment, and the plaintiffs failed to submit opposition papers. The court granted summary judgment after determining that procedure permitted it only to consider the papers submitted by the defendants. It concluded that the defendants were not successors in interest to the company that actually manufactured the product at issue. The court considered that the defendants presented the purchase agreement showing that the purchased assets did not include the product at issue. The defendants further presented a “Stipulation of Release” from the other defendants in the action that stated that the defendants were not involved in the manufacture of the product at issue. Finally, another defendant admitted to ownership of the product.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]