Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Lavoie v. Pacific Press & Shear Co.

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
975 F.2d 48 (2d Cir. 1992)


Facts

Lavoie (plaintiff) was injured by allegedly defective equipment manufactured by Pacific Press & Shear Co. (Pacific) (defendant). Lavoie sued in federal court, alleging breach of the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, strict products liability, and negligence. The district judge noted during a bench conference that there were potential inconsistencies between Lavoie’s theories of recovery. The parties saw the jury instruction at a pre-charge conference, and counsel saw the verdict forms submitted to the jury beforehand. There were two sets of forms: the first said “Special Verdict” and contained a series of questions about each theory, and the second said “Verdicts” and asked if Pacific was liable to Lavoie under each theory. The jury found that Pacific was not liable for breach of warranty or strict liability, but concluded both parties were negligent. The jury assessed Pacific’s negligence at 85 percent and awarded $412,250 in damages. The jurors were polled, and the judge held a bench conference. Pacific moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial on the basis of insufficient evidence, an intervening cause, and jury sympathy. At no point before, during, or after trial did Pacific object to the verdict forms. The district court denied Pacific’s motions. Pacific appealed, asserting for the first time that the verdicts were irreconcilably inconsistent, because a finding of no strict liability or breach of warranty precluded a finding of negligence.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Cardamone, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. 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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.