Mott v. Callahan AMS Machine Co.
New Jersey Superior Court
174 N.J. Super. 202, 416 A.2d 57 (1980)
- Written by Noah Lewis, JD
Facts
Shirley Mott (plaintiff) worked as a packer at Clevepak Corporation. Mott was operating a punch press to which steel coil was being fed from a stock reel. Mott stepped between the reel and the roll feed. The steel was running close to the ground, and the sharp edge of the steel severed the tendon and nerves in Mott’s ankle and foot. Callahan AMS Machinery Company (Callahan) (defendant) manufactured the punch press, Cooper Weymouth Company (Cooper) (defendant) the roll feed, and Cooper Weymouth Maine, Inc. (Cooper) (defendant) the stock reel. Clevepak ordered all three machines from Callahan, which bolted the roll feed to the punch press. Mott brought a products-liability action against Callahan, Cooper, and other Cooper-related entities, Cooper Weymouth Peterson Inc., Carl G. Peterson Co., Sterling Radiator Company Inc., and Reed National Corporation (defendants), alleging a design defect in that although the machines were designed to have space between them, the manufacturers failed to provide safety guards between the stock reel and punch press. The Cooper defendants argued it was Callahan’s responsibility to install safety devices because Cooper’s products could be used with nondangerous materials, such as cloth. Mott’s expert testified that it is standard manufacturing practice to guard against continuous sources of danger rather than expecting employees to avoid the hazard, but Cooper’s vice-president testified that he was unaware of the existence of safety devices in this context. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Cooper companies because Cooper had only furnished a component part, whereas Callahan sold all three parts as a package, making it responsible for installing safety devices. Callahan and Mott appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lora, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.