Groll

Groll v. Shell Oil Co.

Good Law
148 Cal. App. 3d 444·196 Cal. Rptr. 52·1983 Cal. App. LEXIS 2316
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 1983Civ. 64978California1,631 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thomas, J.

Scott Groll (appellant) appeals from a motion for nonsuit granted the manufacturer, Shell Oil Company (respondent). We hold that the duty to warn the ultimate consumer, considering the method of sale, repackaging, and distribution rested with the distributor. Judgment affirmed.

Factual and Procedural History

On October 14, 1976, appellant filed a lawsuit, through his guardian ad litem Richard Groll, wherein he sought damages based on negligence, breach of warranty, and failure to warn. At the time of trial, respondent was the only defendant because appellant had previously settled with Chase Chemical (Chase), the distributor, and Sports, Ltd., the distributor sales company.

At about 12:30 a.m. on October 17, 1975, appellant, then 16 years of age, attempted to light a woodburning fireplace in the bedroom of his residence. After several unsuccessful attempts, he went into the basement to look for lighter fluid. Appellant found a can of Park Ranger Stove and Lantern Fuel (BT-67), read the label on the back, and took it up to his room to light the fireplace.

Appellant testified that he used a cup to transfer the fluid from the can to the logs and some of the fuel could…

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.