From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Werner v. Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Co.

Supreme Court of Nevada
Jun 12, 1975
535 P.2d 161 (Nev. 1975)

Opinion

No. 7702

May 13, 1975 Rehearing denied June 12, 1975

Appeal from Fifth Judicial District Court, Mineral County; Kenneth L. Mann, Judge.

Charles E. Springer, Ltd., of Reno, for Appellant.

Echeverria and Osborne, Chartered, of Reno, for Respondent.


OPINION


The appellant's contention on appeal is that proof of actual damages is not an essential part of a plaintiff's case under the doctrine of strict liability in tort in the area of products liability. The appellant fails to cite any authority for this claimed error and as such this court need not consider it. Bradshaw v. General Electric Co., 91 Nev. 124, 531 P.2d 1358 (1975); General Electric Co. v. Bush, 88 Nev. 360, 498 P.2d 366 (1972). Further, such a contention is without merit for actual injury must be shown to recover on a theory of strict liability in tort and mere nominal damages to vindicate a technical right are insufficient. Ginnis v. Mapes Hotel Corp., 86 Nev. 408, 470 P.2d 135 (1970); Shoshone Coca-Cola v. Dolinski, 82 Nev. 439, 420 P.2d 855 (1966).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Werner v. Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Co.

Supreme Court of Nevada
Jun 12, 1975
535 P.2d 161 (Nev. 1975)
Case details for

Werner v. Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Co.

Case Details

Full title:DOROTHY E.M. WERNER, APPELLANT, v. SHOSHONE COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY…

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada

Date published: Jun 12, 1975

Citations

535 P.2d 161 (Nev. 1975)
535 P.2d 161

Citing Cases

Cooper v. Pacific Automobile Insurance Company

In view of this failure, we may opt not to consider the assignments of error. Plankinton v. Nye County, 95…

Bennett v. Fidelity Deposit Co.

Therefore, we need not consider appellants' contention. Plankinton v. Nye County, 95 Nev. 12, 588 P.2d 1025…