Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 786 P.2d 939.

29 citing documents.

Okland v. Zurn Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Okland v. Zurn Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
seller.” Antone, 214 Ariz. at 552-53, ¶ 12 (citation omitted); see, e.g., Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (trademark licensors); Jordan v. Sunnyslope Appliance Propane & Plumbing Supplies Co., (used goods dealers); –46 (App. 1978) (pharmaceutical product donors).
Keg Restaurants Arizona, Inc. v. Jones 375 P.3d 1173 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Keg Restaurants Arizona, Inc. v. Jones 375 P.3d 1173 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
See Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co,, Inc., , (“The parent company owns the subsidiaries, designates their directors and officers, allocates the capital needed and used by the subsidiaries, and enjoys the profits made by them.
Grubb v. Do It Best Corporation 279 P.3d 626 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Grubb v. Do It Best Corporation 279 P.3d 626 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
ts have defined seller broadly, in accordance with the policies underlying strict liability, they have excluded from liability entities which do not participate significantly in the stream of commerce and do not have “‘the right to control the incidents of manufacture or distribution.’” Antone, 214 Ariz. 550, ¶¶ 12, 33, 155 P.3d at 1076-77, 1080, quoting Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
State Farm Insurance Companies v. Premier Manufactured Systems, Inc. 172 P.3d 410 Ariz. 2007
State Farm Insurance Companies v. Premier Manufactured Systems, Inc. 172 P.3d 410 Ariz. 2007
Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Antone v. Greater Arizona Auto Auction, Inc. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Antone v. Greater Arizona Auto Auction, Inc. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
seller.” Unique Equip., 3 P.3d at 976; see, e.g., Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 163 Ariz. 88, 96, (trademark licensors); Jordan v. Sunnyslope Appliance Propane & Plumbing Supplies Co., (used goods dealers); -46, -39 (App. 1978) (pharmaceutical product donors).
Bentley v. Zensano, Inc. 127 P.3d 903 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Bentley v. Zensano, Inc. 127 P.3d 903 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
But see Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , (noting the "essence of production” test that might permit liability).
Bridgestone Firestone North America Tire v. A.P.S. Rent a Car & Leasing Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
Bridgestone Firestone North America Tire v. A.P.S. Rent a Car & Leasing Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
use[] or consumption.”); Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (lessors of products and dealers in used goods may be subject to strict liability); Restatement (Third) of Torts, Products Liability §§ 8, 20(b) (1998).
Winsor v. Glasswerks PHX, L.L.C. 63 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Winsor v. Glasswerks PHX, L.L.C. 63 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , (“The underlying objective of the doctrine [of products liability] was to place the risk of loss on those in the chain of distribution of defective, unreasonably dangerous goods.”) (emphasis added); Tucson Indus., -68 , -40 (1972) (“St
Scheehle v. Justices of the Supreme Court 57 P.3d 379 Ariz. 2002
Scheehle v. Justices of the Supreme Court 57 P.3d 379 Ariz. 2002
See Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , (state court will strive to respond affirmatively to certification request when the federal court may otherwise be left to speculate on the answer); see also Arizonans for Official English, 520 U.S. 43, 76 , 117 S.Ct.
Unique Equipment Co. v. TRW Vehicle Safety Systems, Inc. 3 P.3d 970 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Unique Equipment Co. v. TRW Vehicle Safety Systems, Inc. 3 P.3d 970 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
See Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , (courts should “abjure technical definitions in defining the categories of enterprise to which the doctrine of strict [product] liability should apply”).
Jimenez v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. 904 P.2d 861 Ariz. 1995
Jimenez v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. 904 P.2d 861 Ariz. 1995
See Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Gibbs v. O'Malley Lumber Co. 868 P.2d 355 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Mineer v. Atlas Tire Co. 806 P.2d 904 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
Mineer v. Atlas Tire Co. 806 P.2d 904 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
Finally, plaintiffs cross-appeal from the dismissal of Atlas Tire Company, contending that the supervening case of Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , mandates a finding of liability.
Catalina Mortg. Co., Inc. v. Monier 800 P.2d 574 Ariz. 1990
Catalina Mortg. Co., Inc. v. Monier 800 P.2d 574 Ariz. 1990
We exercise our discretion in accordance with the principles set forth in Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc.
WALKER BY PIZANO v. Mart 790 P.2d 735 Ariz. 1990
WALKER BY PIZANO v. Mart 790 P.2d 735 Ariz. 1990
We exercise our discretion in accordance with the principles set forth in Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by