 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Selma Pressure Treating Co. v. Osmose Wood Preserving Co.6/25/1990
ssary. (See Seely v. White Motor Co. (1965) 63 Cal. 2d 9, 18 [45 Cal. Rptr. 17, 403 P.2d 145], but see Huang v. Garner (1984) 157 Cal. App. 3d 404, 420 [203 Cal. Rptr. 800].)
"'"Economic" loss or harm has been defined as "damages for inadequate value, costs of repair and replacement of the defective product or consequent loss of profits -- without any claim of personal injury or damages to other property . . . ."' ([ Alfred N. Koplin & Co. v. Chrysler Corp. (1977) 49 Ill.App.3d 194 (364 N.E.2d 100, 103)], quoting, Note, Economic Loss in Products Liability Jurisprudence (1966) 66 Colum.L.Rev. 917, 918; see also Star Furniture Co. v. Pulaski Furniture Co. (W.Va. 1982) 297 S.E.2d 854, 859.)" (Sacramento Regional Transit Dist. v. Grumman Flxible (1984) 158 Cal. App. 3d 289, 294 [204 Cal. Rptr. 736].)
Our earlier finding that the State is entitled to seek damages for injury to its property interests defeats this claim. The State's recovery would be in the nature of damages, not economic loss.
II-IV
Many motions and requests for judicial notice were brought before this court while these matters were pending. Some have been ruled upon separately; insofar as all other remaining motions or requests are not granted,
either expressly or impliedly in this opinion, they are deemed denied. Also, the petition for writ of mandate or prohibition is denied, petitioner having an adequate legal remedy by way of the subsequently filed appeal. All matters raised in the petition were considered in conjunction with the subsequent appeal.
Judgment of dismissal of Schuessler's and SPTC's claims for equitable indemnity against Osmose is reversed; in all other respects the judgment is affirmed. Judgment of dismissal of SLC and Petery's claims against Vulcan, Reichhold and Monsanto for equitable indemnity and for maintenance of a nuisance are reversed; in all other respects the judgment is affirmed. Costs to appellants.
Disposition
Many motions and requests for judicial notice were brought before this court while these matters were pending. Some have been ruled upon separately; insofar as all other remaining motions or requests are not granted, either expressly or impliedly in this opinion, they are deemed denied. Also, the petition for writ of mandate or prohibition is denied, petitioner having an adequate legal remedy by way of the subsequently filed appeal. All matters raised in the petition were considered in conjunction with the subsequent appeal.
Judgment of dismissal of Schuessler's and SPTC's claims for equitable indemnity against Osmose is reversed; in all other respects the judgment is affirmed. Judgment of dismissal of SLC and Petery's claims against Vulcan, Reichhold and Monsanto for equitable indemnity and for maintenance of a nuisance are reversed; in all other respects the judgment is affirmed. Costs to appellants.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|