Higgins v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co.
United States District Court for the District of Maryland
671 F. Supp. 1055 (1987)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Eastman and Union Carbide (defendants) were bulk suppliers of liquid chemicals to E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, Inc. (DuPont) (defendant). Specifically, Eastman and Union Carbide supplied glycol ether acetates to DuPont for use in DuPont’s paint. Eastman and Union Carbide supplied the chemicals to DuPont in railroad cars and tank trucks. DuPont then reprocessed the chemicals into its paint and sold the paint to the Baltimore City Fire Department. Kevin Higgins and several other firefighters (plaintiffs) used the paint. Subsequently, the firefighters each had a child die at birth. The firefighters brought suit against DuPont, Eastman, and Union Carbide for failure to warn of the dangers of the glycol ether acetates, which caused birth defects and stillbirths. The firefighters presented a DuPont memorandum indicating that DuPont knew of the birth-related dangers of glycol ether acetates before purchasing the chemicals for its paint. Eastman and Union Carbide filed motions for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Smalkin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.