CONEY V. J.L.G. INDUSTRIES, INC.
Sup. Ct. of Ill., 97 Ill.2d 104, 454 N.E.2d 197, 73 Ill. Dec. 337 (1983)
NATURE OF THE CASE: J.L.G. (D) appealed an order which denied D's application for leave
to appeal the trial court's decision striking D's affirmative defenses in a strict products
liability action.
FACTS: Jasper was killed while operating a hydraulic aerial work platform made by D.
Coney (P) the adminstrator of Jasper's estate filed a two-count complaint against D in
wrongful death and survival based on strict products liability. D argued that Jasper had
committed contributory negligence and that Jasper's employer was partially negligent by
failing to instruct and train Jasper on the platform and for failing to provide a ground
man. D requested that its fault, if any, be compared to the total fault of all parties and
any judgment against D reflect only its percentage of the overall liability, i.e., that D
not be held jointly and severally liable. Three questions were certified to the Supreme
Court. Whether the doctrine of comparative negligence or fault is applicable to actions or
claims seeking recovery under products liability or strict liability in tort theories?
Whether the doctrine of comparative negligence or fault eliminates joint and several
liability? Whether the retention of joint and several liability in a system of comparative
negligence or fault denies defendants equal protection of the laws in violation of U.S.
Const. Amend. XIV, 1 and Ill. Const. 1970, 2 as to causes of action arising on or after
[sic] March 1, 1978. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 70, 301 et seq.)?' D contends that under
comparative negligence the doctrine of joint and several liability has been abolished.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment