Defendants Back Dismissal, Say Every Welding Product Had Warning Label
January 25, 2008
DOCUMENTS
- Aiding & Abetting Order
- Conspiracy Order
- Defendants' Response
- Failure-to-Warn Order
- July 23 Order
- Negligent Undertaking Order
- Plaintiff's Brief
CLEVELAND -- Defendants in an Ohio state welding fume case have filed an appellate brief backing a trial court's decision to bar failure-to-warn claims because the plaintiff admitted he didn't read the warnings on the welding consumable products. Boyd v. Lincoln Electric, et al., No. CA-07-090315 (Ohio Ct. App., 8th Dist.).
In the Dec. 28 brief filed in the Ohio Eight District Court of Appeals, the defendants refute a challenge to the adequacy of the warnings by the plaintiffs, saying that since the court did not address the adequacy of the warnings in the decision dismissing the claims, the appellate …
UPCOMING CONFERENCES

HarrisMartin's Mass Tort Settlements Conference - Sponsored by Milestone
June 25, 2025 - Buffalo, NY
The Westin Buffalo