Negligent Marketing Claims Under Fire

Giliberti, Frank J.
January 2002
Marketing Management;Jan/Feb2002, Vol. 11 Issue 1, p43
Focuses on the decision issued by New York State's top court, the Court of Appeals in Hamilton versus Beretta U.S.A. Corp. analyzing a negligent marketing claim brought against several gun manufacturers. Background of the case; Reason for the reluctant to impose a duty on gun manufacturers according to the court; Fatal impediments to imposing a general duty of care in the case.


Related Articles

  • NY court: Women can sue after miscarriage, stillbirth.  // Contemporary OB/GYN;Jun2004, Vol. 49 Issue 6, p12 

    The article reports on the fears of state physicians over the decision of the New York Court of Appeals to permit a woman to file a case should her miscarriage or stillbirth becomes a consequence of medical malpractice. The profession said that women could sue for emotional distress without...

  • Court issues opinion on Starbucks tip pooling.  // Nation's Restaurant News;7/8/2013, Vol. 47 Issue 13, p6 

    The article focuses on the advisory opinion issued by the New York State Court of Appeals which was related to the lawsuits filed by the coffee company Starbucks Corp.

  • COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK. Pinnola, Christina // Touro Law Review;Mar2011, Vol. 26 Issue 3, p969 

    The article discusses the initiative of New York Court of Appeals to address the constitutionality of registering individuals not convicted of sexually related crimes as sex offenders. It mentions that the defendant would claim his or her due process rights were violated. It states the court...

  • Pru MasterShare Plan Goes to New York High Court. Retkwa, Rosalyn // On Wall Street;Oct2003, Vol. 13 Issue 10, p20 

    Reports on a court hearing that will take place at the New York State Court of Appeals in Albany on October 15, 2003 to determine whether the forfeiture provision in Prudential Securities' MasterShare deferred compensation plan violates state labor law. Arguments presented by former Prudential...

  • Open space restriction noted on final plat is enforceable against a subsequent purchaser.  // Planning;Feb2008, Vol. 74 Issue 2, p57 

    The article discusses the case filed by a landowner regarding the open space restriction which is noted on the finals to be enforceable against a subsequent purchaser in Wappinger Creek, New York. The plaintiff sued to the Second Circuit and asked the New York Court of Appeals to rule on a...

  • N.Y. Ruling Highlights Differing Interests of Issuer, Underwriter. Whalen, Robert // Bond Buyer;7/21/2005, Vol. 353 Issue 32179, p1 

    Reports on the decision of the New York Court of Appeals upholding the differences in the interests of municipal bond issuers and underwriters that market the debt. Details of the EBC I Inc. v. Goldman Sachs & Co. case handled by the court; Opinion of the court on the issue; Outlook on the role...

  • GIS and traffic data ruled public information.  // IRE Journal;Jul/Aug2005, Vol. 28 Issue 4, p5 

    Reports on the participation of the Investigative Reporters and Editors Inc. in two court cases to ensure the public's right to data. Decision of the Connecticut Supreme Court to uphold a trial court ruling that allows the public access to geographic information system data from Greenwich;...

  • New York's high court splits on projects pacts. Krizan, William G. // ENR: Engineering News-Record;4/08/96, Vol. 236 Issue 14, p15 

    Presents information on a ruling by New York's State's highest court concerning the state's competitive bidding laws. How the pacts must be assessed; What was issued by the court; What the court distanced itself from; Comments from the New York Court of Appeals; Other information on the New...

  • Appeals court rejects North Salem's appeal of zoning decision. Philippidis, Alex // Westchester County Business Journal;10/2/95, Vol. 34 Issue 40, p9 

    Reports that the New York State Court of Appeals has rejected a request by North Salem to appeal a 1993 State Supreme Court ruling that the town unconstitutionally zoned the property six years earlier in order to exclude affordable housing. Compensation paid; 1975 Berenson decision.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics