Opinion ID: 1280969
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: after remamd

Text: BRICKLEY, C.J. This case involves liability of a nonmanufacturing seller for personal injuries that plaintiff Eric Seasword sustained while using a drill that is alleged to have been negligently designed. Plaintiff seeks recovery from defendant Hilti, Inc., on the basis of Hilti, Inc.'s, status as: (1) the nonmanufacturing seller or distributor of the drill (seller theory), (2) the apparent manufacturer of the drill, or (3) the subsidiary corporation of the manufacturer of the drill. In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether the Court of Appeals erred by affirming the summary disposition of plaintiff's apparent-manufacturer theory and parent-subsidiary theory of liability. [1] For the reasons explained herein, we decline to adopt the apparent-manufacturer doctrine, and we affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals regarding the summary disposition of plaintiff's parent-subsidiary theory of liability.