Rodriguez

Rodriguez v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

Good Law
627 F.3d 1259·2010 WL 4925412·2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24430
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 30, 201010-15813California3,087 words

Opinion

Opinion

Callahan, J.

Defendant-appellant General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products, Inc. (“General Dynamics”), seeks to appeal from the district court’s denial of its summary judgment motion in an action arising from the premature explosion of a mortar cartridge manufactured by General Dynamics during an army training exercise in Hawaii. The explosion killed Oscar Rodriguez and injured Samuel Oyola-Perez, Julius Riggins, and Wilfredo Dayandante (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), the other soldiers in the training detail, who brought suit against General Dynamics alleging, inter alia, products liability and negligence claims under Hawaii law. General Dynamics moved for summary judgment on the merits of the Plaintiffs’ claims and also on the ground that the government contractor defense, first articulated in Boyle v. United Technologies Corp., 487 U.S. 500 , 108 S.Ct. 2510 , 101 L.Ed.2d 442 (1988), barred Plaintiffs’ claims. The district court denied both motions, holding that a genuine issue of material fact as to what caused the explosion precluded summary judgment. General Dynamics filed a timely notice of appeal challenging the portion of the district court’s order denying summary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.