Title: Travelers Insurance Companies v. Demarle, Inc. USA

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

Travelers Insurance Companies v. Demarle, Inc., USA (2003-527); 178 Vt. 570;
878 A.2d 267

2005 VT 53

[Filed 04-May-2005]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                                 2005 VT 53

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2003-527

                             DECEMBER TERM, 2004

  Travelers Insurance Companies and 	}	APPEALED FROM:
  Greyston Bakery, Inc.	                }
                                        }
       v.	                        }	Chittenden Superior Court
                                        }	
  Demarle, Inc., USA	                }
                                        }	DOCKET NO. S-826-99 Cnc

                                                Trial Judge: Matthew I. Katz

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       ¶  1.  Plaintiffs Travelers Insurance Companies and Greyston Bakery,
  Inc. appeal the superior court's order granting defendant Demarle, Inc.,
  USA summary judgment and dismissing plaintiffs' lawsuit alleging that
  Demarle sold Greyston defective baking mats that contaminated Greyston's
  food products.  The trial court concluded that plaintiffs failed to allege
  facts from which they could prove that defective or warranted mats caused
  the contamination.  We affirm.

       ¶  2.  Greyston is a New York corporation that manufactures baked
  goods and sells them to other companies, primarily Ben & Jerry's Homemade,
  Inc., for incorporation into other products such as ice cream.  In early
  October 1997, Ben & Jerry's noticed small fibers in brownies that it had
  purchased from Greyston.  After notifying Greyston of the problem, Ben &
  Jerry's disposed of approximately 47,000 gallons of potentially
  contaminated ice cream and yogurt worth an estimated $600,000.  Greyston's
  ensuing investigation revealed that the silicon-based baking mats it used
  to keep the brownies from sticking to its oven pans had caused the
  contamination.  Greyston had been purchasing the baking mats, called
  Silpats, from Demarle since 1993.  During the first week of October 1997,
  after discovering the contamination, Greyston disposed of its entire stock
  of Silpats.  On October 22, Greyston informed Demarle that Ben & Jerry's
  had found fibers from the Silpats in Greyston's brownies.  Eventually,
  Greyston and its insurer, Travelers Insurance Companies, paid Ben & Jerry's
  over $450,000 in exchange for an assignment of any rights the ice cream
  manufacturer had against Demarle.  Plaintiffs then sued Demarle based on
  claims of products liability, breach of warranty, negligence, and indemnity
  and contribution.  The superior court granted Demarle's motion for summary
  judgment and dismissed plaintiffs' claims, ruling that (1) with respect to
  the products liability and breach-of-warranty claims, plaintiffs failed to
  demonstrate that they would be able to prove by a preponderance of the
  evidence that defective or warranted mats caused the contamination; (2) the
  negligence claim was foreclosed by the economic-loss rule; and (3) the
  indemnity and contribution claims were dependent on the other causes of
  action that had been dismissed.
   
       ¶  3.  On appeal, plaintiffs do not challenge the superior court's
  dismissal of their negligence claim, but argue that they presented genuine
  issues of material fact creating a jury question as to whether Demarle
  breached express and implied warranties by selling Greyston defective
  Silpats.  The issue for this Court, then, is whether the superior court
  erred by ruling, as a matter of law based on plaintiffs' alleged facts,
  that plaintiffs would be unable to prove causation by a preponderance of
  the evidence.  In an appeal from a summary judgment ruling, we apply the
  same standard as that applied by the trial court; therefore, we must
  determine whether genuine issues of material fact exist and, if not,
  whether any party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.  Carr v.
  Peerless Ins. Co., 168 Vt. 465, 466,