Court Opinion

ID: 9713509
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:16:37.788838+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:19.108073
License: Public Domain

DAY, J.
(dissenting). I dissent. I agree with that portion of Justice Callow’s dissent which points out that, even if one accepts the majority’s theory that the form of the predecessor business organization, be it sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation, is irrelevant to the imposition of successor liability, the record in this case does not support the conclusion that Forage King Industries, Inc. is either a merger, consolidation or continuation of Woodrow W. Wiberg’s sole proprietorship which manufactured the allegedly defective chopper box. Leannais v. Cincinnati, Inc., 565 F.2d 437, 439 (7th Cir. 1977). For that reason, I would hold that Forage King Industries, Inc., is entitled to summary judgment dismissing it from this action.