FRANCENE RASTELLI AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JOHN A. WUNDERLICH,
DECEASED, RESPONDENT, v. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, APPELLANT, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS, THE BUDD COMPANY, RESPONDENT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
79 N.Y.2d 289, 591 N.E.2d 222, 582 N.Y.S.2d 373 (1992).
March 31, 1992
3 No. 38
Decided March 31, 1992
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
Alan D. Kaplan, for Appellant.
Susan Corcoran, for Respondent Rastelli.
Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., amicus curiae.
Association of Trial Lawyers of America, amicus curiae.
Washington Legal Foundation, amicus curiae.
HANCOCK, J. :
Plaintiff's decedent was killed while inflating a truck tire,
manufactured by Goodyear, when the multipiece tire rim, not
manufactured by Goodyear, separated explosively. The issues are
whether (1) Goodyear may be subject to concerted action liability
under the alleged facts in this product liability action and (2)
Goodyear has a duty to warn against its non- defective tire being used
with an allegedly defective tire rim manufactured by others. For the
reasons stated below, we conclude that plaintiff's claims under both
theories of liability should be dismissed. Accordingly, we reverse the
order of the Appellate Division.
I
In June 1984, John Wunderlich was inflating a tire on his employer's
1970 Chevrolet dump truck when the multipiece tire rim, upon which the
tire was mounted, violently flew apart. A piece of the rim struck
Wunderlich in the head, killing him instantly. Multipiece rims are not
a uniform product. The tire, manufactured by defendant Goodyear Tire &
Rubber Company, was compatible for use on some but not all multipiece
rim assemblies.(n 1) The particular rim assembly involved in this
case was an RH5 degree ("RH5") model, consisting of a side or locking
ring marked "Firestone, 20 x 6.0, RH5" and a rim base marked "K- H"
for the Kelsey-Hayes Company. The Appellate Division concluded that
Goodyear neither manufactured nor sold the subject rim or its parts
SNIPPETS:
DEFENDANTS, THE BUDD COMPANY, RESPONDENT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff's decedent was killed while inflating a truck tire, manufactured by Goodyear, when
The issues are whether Goodyear may be subject to concerted action liability under the
The tire, manufactured by defendant Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, was compatible for use on
The Appellate Division concluded that Goodyear neither manufactured nor sold the subject rim
Goodyear's proof that it never has been a manufacturer or marketer of the RH5 rim assembly
In August 1985, plaintiff Francine Rastelli, as administratrix of the decedent's estate,
Goodyear moved for summary judgment based upon proof that it had not designed, manufactured
Supreme Court denied Goodyear's motion, with leave to renew after the completion of discovery.
The Appellate Division modified by reversing to the extent of granting Goodyear summary
However, it concluded that plaintiff's submissions for her concerted action claims "were
original)).
The court also held that plaintiff's negligence and strict products liability claims set
it stated that plaintiff's allegations that the subject Goodyear tire was made exclusively
Goodyear appeals pursuant to leave granted by the Appellate Division, arguing that the tort
The theory of concerted action "provides for joint and several liability on the part of all
Parallel activity among companies developing and marketing the same product, without more, we
In Hymowitz, this Court declined to adopt a modified version of concerted action, holding
Accordingly, we must determine whether plaintiff has made any showing that the rim
She alleges that the subject Goodyear tire was made for installation on a multipiece rim,
Goodyear's tire did not create the alleged defect in the rim that caused the rim to explode.
|
