SUSAN M. STEELE, Plaintiff & Appellant, v. BELL-CARTER FOODS, INC, ET AL., Defendants & Respondents., No. A151952, 2019 WL 312146 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 24, 2019)
Susan Steele (Steele) cracked her tooth while eating an olive that contained a pit or pit fragment. The olive came from a can processed and distributed by Bell-Carter Foods, Inc. et al. (Bell-Carter). In the underlying personal injury action, the trial court granted Bell-Carter summary judgment, finding that a person injured by the natural part of a food item may not recover damages based on theories of strict liability or breach of warranty. (Mexicali Rose v. Superior Court (1992) 1 Cal.4th 617 (Mexicali Rose).) On appeal, Steele contends that Mexicali Rose should not be applied to bar her claims against Bell-Carter. The court affirms judgment.
Finch v. Pepperidge Farms, Inc., No. 1:18-CV-152-GHD-DAS, 2019 WL 302506 (N.D. Miss. Jan. 23, 2019)
In July 2018, Defendant Pepperidge Farms issued a product recall for its popular Goldfish crackers after learning that an ingredient provided by Defendant Associated Milk Producers that it used on the crackers may have been infected with salmonella. Immediately prior to the recall, Plaintiff Bailey Finch ate some Goldfish crackers and developed a salmonella infection.
Finch filed this suit, and in her original complaint she asserted product liability claims, as well as claims for negligence, negligence per se, and breach of implied warranty of merchantability. Pepperidge Farms moved to dismiss the negligence, negligence per se, and warranty claims, arguing the Mississippi Products Liability Act provided the exclusive causes of actions for liability based on product defects, and that the Act provided no causes of action for negligence, negligence per se, or breach of an implied warranty.
Finch amended her complaint, now asserting “product defect, failure to warn, breach of warranties, and negligence [claims] brought under the Mississippi Product Liability Act.” The amended complaint contains much of same factual allegations as the previous one, many relating to Defendants negligence, violation of certain Mississippi and federal statutes, and breach of implied warranties.
H.R. 737: To prohibit the sale of shark fins, and for other purposes. Info HERE