Fuller v. Colgate-Palmolive Company
Filing 21
ORDER: In its Motion to Dismiss, Defendant argues, and Plaintiff concedes, that the Ohio Products Liability Act ("OPLA") abrogates Plaintiff's claims for implied warranty of fitness and implied warranty of merchantability. See ECF N os. 14, 17. Wimbush v. Wyeth, 619 F.3d 632 (6th Cir. 2010), and WEL Companies v. Haldex Brake Products Corporation, 467 F. Supp. 3d 545 (S.D. Ohio 2020), suggest, however, that OPLA abrogates "all common law claims arising from damages in conn ection with product liability claims," WEL Cos., 467 F. Supp. 3d at 557, "unless [the] common law claims fall into an exception," id. at 558. No later than February 7, 2025, Defendant shall advise the Court as to whether OPLA abrogates all of Plaintiff's product liability claims. Plaintiff shall reply no later than February 14, 2025. SO ORDERED. ( Replies due by 2/14/2025.) (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 1/28/2025) (tg)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.