Case ID: nw2d_389/html/0346-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "GIERKE, Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

David SHULSTAD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BERKEL, INC. d/b/a United States Slicing Machine Co., Inc., Defendant and Appellee.
    Civ. No. 11094.
    Supreme Court of North Dakota.
    June 19, 1986.
    Rufer, Hefte, Pemberton, Schulze, Sorlie, Sefkow & Kershner, Fergus Falls, Minn., for plaintiff and appellant; argued by H. Morrison Kershner.
    Arvesen, Lundeen, Hoff, Svingen & Athens, Fergus Falls, Minn., for defendant and appellee; argued by Thomas C. Athens.
    Nicholas J. Spaeth, Atty. Gen., Lynn C. Jordheim, Sol. Gen., Michael J. Geiermann, Asst. Atty. Gen., Bismarck, for amicus curiae State; argued by Lynn C. Jordheim.
    Lundberg, Nodland, Lucas & Schulz, P.C., Bismarck, amicus curiae for North Dakota Wholesalers & Manufacturers Ass’n, Inc.; argued by A. William Lucas.
   GIERKE, Justice.

David Shulstad appeals from a district court judgment dismissing his products liability action. The district court granted the motion of appellee, Berkel, Inc., d/b/a United States Slicing Machine Co., Inc. (Berkel), for summary judgment pursuant to § 28-01.1-02 of the North Dakota Century Code. We reverse and remand for trial.

On August 31, 1981, Shulstad, while employed by a retail meat market was severely injured. Shulstad was cleaning a meat grinder when a fellow employee turned on the power which engaged the auger. Shul-stad’s right hand was mangled and permanently injured. The meat grinder was manufactured by Berkel on July 8, 1965.

On appeal, Shulstad challenges the constitutionality of § 28-01.1-02, N.D.C.C., the “statute of limitation” of the North Dakota Products Liability Act. Recently, we considered the validity of § 28-01.1-02 and found it to be violative of Article I, § 21 of the North Dakota Constitution. Hanson v. Williams Co., 389 N.W.2d 319 (N.D.1986). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for trial.

VANDE WALLE, LEVINE and MESCHKE, JJ., concur.

ERICKSTAD, Chief Justice, dissenting,

I respectfully dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in Hanson v. Williams Co., 389 N.W.2d 319 (N.D.1986).