Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

Port Authority of New York & New Jersey v. Arcadian Corp.

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
189 F.3d 305 (1999)


Facts

On February 26, 1993, terrorists detonated a bomb under the World Trade Center in New York City, causing six deaths, many injuries, and substantial property damage. The terrorists had constructed the bomb using fertilizers—ammonium nitrate, urea, and nitric acid—manufactured by Arcadian Corporation, Hydro-Agri North America, Inc., and Dyno Nobel Inc. (defendants). The fertilizers, sold in their raw form, were not defective or dangerous in themselves. The explosive character of the bomb was effectuated by combining the fertilizers with other products. The Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (Port Authority) (plaintiff), owner of the World Trade Center, sued defendants under theories of negligence, strict products liability, and failure to warn. The Port Authority argued that defendants could have rendered their products non-detonable and could have warned sellers thereof to ensure that the products were being purchased for legitimate use. The Port Authority contended that defendants had reason to know that the products could be made explosive because of two explosions caused by ammonium nitrate more than 30 years in the past and because the products were regulated by several foreign countries owing to their explosion-producing capabilities. A federal district court dismissed the complaint for failing to state a viable cause of action. The Port Authority appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Roth, 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, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Concurrence (Hoeveler, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

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 170,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.