Goehring

Goehring v. Target

Good Law
91 F. App'x 1
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 16, 2004No. 01-36066, 01-36091; D.C. No. CV-99-00007-EJL(MHW), CV-99-00007-MHWCalifornia2,540 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The district court granted summary-judgment to defendants below, on plaintiffs’ claim that inadequate warnings about odor-fade on propane gas caused injuries to the Goehring family when plaintiff Sam Goehring lit a cigarette in the Goehrings’ tent. Propane gas which no longer had a detectable odor had leaked from a heater inside the tent during the night. When Sam lit a cigarette the next morning a flash-fire ignited. The district court held that Sam Goehring’s failure to read and heed the warnings given was the proximate cause of the plaintiffs’ injuries. The district court held that additional warnings would not have changed the outcome and thus decided the issue of causation in favor of defendants on summary judgment. Plaintiffs appeal, arguing that the issue of causation should have been presented to the jury. Also presented on appeal is a cross-appeal by Flying J, the retail vendor of the propane, challenging the district court’s decision that Flying J had a duty to warn plaintiffs about the dangers of propane gas and breached that duty.

This Court has jurisdiction to hear this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . The district court’s ruling is affirmed with…

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.