From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
Brown v. Kleen Kut Manuf. Co.
Kansas Supreme Court
238 Kan. 642 (1986)
Eddie M. Brown, Jr. (plaintiff) was working at a restaurant in Kansas on July 23, 1976, when he severely injured his hand grinding meat, requiring amputation of his hand. At the time of his injury, Brown was using a meat grinder manufactured before 1955 in Cleveland, Ohio, by Kleen Kut Manufacturing Company (Kleen Kut) (defendant), an Ohio corporation. In 1955 Toledo Scale Corporation (Toledo Scale) (defendant), another Ohio corporation, purchased Kleen Kut’s assets under a contract executed in Ohio. Toledo Scale paid adequate consideration, did not purchase Kleen Kut’s stock, and did not assume Kleen Kut’s liabilities, and there was no continuity of ownership. Kleen Kut was dissolved in 1956. Toledo Scale merged into Reliance Electric and Engineering Company (defendant), an Ohio corporation, in 1967, and that company merged into Reliance Electric Company (defendant), another Ohio corporation, in 1969. Brown filed a tort suit against Kleen Kut, Toledo Scale, Reliance Electric and Engineering Company, and Reliance Electric Company in 1978, asserting they were strictly liable for his injuries. The trial court granted Kleen Kut’s motion to dismiss, holding that under Ohio law an action could not be maintained against a dissolved corporation such a long time after the corporation’s dissolution. Toledo Scale, Reliance Electric and Engineering Company, and Reliance Electric Company (collectively, the Kleen Kut successor corporations) moved for summary judgment, arguing that they could not be liable for Brown’s injuries as successor corporations. The trial court granted the Kleen Kut successor corporations’ motion. Brown appealed, arguing that the trial court applied law from the wrong jurisdiction.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Herd, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 605,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 605,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.