Liriano v. Hobart Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
170 F.3d 264 (1999)
- Written by Kheana Pollard, JD
Facts
Luis Liriano (plaintiff) was a 17-year-old boy who recently immigrated to the United States. He was hired at Super Associated (Super) (defendant), where he used a meat grinder manufactured by Hobart Corporation (Hobart) (defendant). Liriano was never trained on how to operate the meat grinder. The safety guard had been removed and the machine had no warning label. After working at Super for week, Liriano had only operated the grinder two or three times. Liriano was severely injured after his hand got caught in the grinder. Liriano brought suit against Hobart for failure to warn, and Hobart brought a third-party claim against Super. The court dismissed all but the failure-to-warn claim, and the jury found in favor of Liriano. A partial retrial was held to determine how much Liriano contributed to his injury. Liriano was assigned one-third of fault on the retrial as his actions were considered likely to cause his type of injury. Hobart and Super appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Calabresi, J.)
Concurrence (Newman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.
