Posts from June 2017.

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On June 20, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Kawasaki Recalls Utility Vehicles, Recreational Off-Highway Vehicles and All-Terrain Vehicles Due to Fire Hazard.Continue Reading

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On May 26, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Cordless Electric Lawn Mowers Recalled Due to Fire Hazard; Made by Hongkong Sun Rise Trading.Continue Reading

In Goodman v. Heritage Builders, Inc., 390 P.3d 398 (Colo. 2017) (en banc), the Supreme Court of Colorado clarified the parameters for timely-filing third-party claims for indemnification or contribution in construction defects cases. The court held that C.R.S. § 13-80-104(1)(b)(II) – addressing when a party can file third-party indemnification and contribution claims – controls over the two-year statute of limitations period set forth in C.R.S. § 13-80-102 and the six-year statute of repose period in C.R.S. § 13-80-104(1)(a). Thus, in Colorado, so long as third-party ... Continue Reading

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Calendar Event Calendar

Subscribe

Jump to Page

By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.