Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Apex Oil Company, Inc. v. Jones Stephens Corp.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

February 5, 2018

Apex Oil Company, Inc., Plaintiff- Appellant,
v.
Jones Stephens Corp., Defendant-Appellee.

          Submitted: September 20, 2017

         Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock

          Before COLLOTON, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

          COLLOTON, Circuit Judge.

         Apex Oil Company appeals a grant of summary judgment dismissing several products liability claims that it brought against Jones Stephens Corporation. We agree with the district court[1] that there was insufficient evidence to support any of the theories that Apex advances on appeal, and we therefore affirm.

         I.

         Jones Stephens sold a PlumBest plumbing supply line to a builder or plumbing contractor, and it was installed in 2004 or 2005 at a building owned by Apex Oil Company in Humphrey, Arkansas. The supply line, which was connected to a toilet on the second floor of the building, consisted of a stainless steel braided hose with a plastic coupling nut on the end. A label affixed to the supply line included the following statement: "Leak proof seal-High quality outer braid of stainless steel and exclusive crimp on fittings for maximum performance."

         According to Apex's evidence, on or about January 16, 2013, someone discovered a stream of water coming from the second floor bathroom of Apex's building. The water caused damage to the building and to property inside. An investigation into the cause of the escaping water determined that a plastic coupling nut on the supply line failed after it fractured at the intersection of the base of the nut and the threaded walls. An expert witness retained by Apex averred that the plastic coupling nut was improperly manufactured because the plastic contained voids. The expert also opined that "the fact that voids could be formed during the manufacturing of plastic coupling nuts was well known in the industry prior to 2004."

         Apex sued Jones Stephens in the district court, alleging state-law claims based on strict liability, failure to warn, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, negligence, reckless negligence, deceptive trade practices, and warranty violations.

         The district court granted Jones Stephens's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint.

         II.

         Apex appeals the district court's dismissal of four claims: strict liability, negligence, negligent failure to warn, and deceptive trade practices. As a federal court with jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship, we apply the substantive law of Arkansas to this dispute, and we review the judgment de novo. See S & A Farms, Inc. v. Farms.com, Inc., 678 F.3d 949, 954 (8th Cir. 2012). Summary judgment is warranted where there is no genuine issue of material fact for trial and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a).

         A.

         Apex argues that Jones Stephens is strictly liable because the "toilet supply line was unreasonably dangerous beyond the extent which would be contemplated by the ordinary and reasonable user." Under ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.