Court Opinion

ID: 9599491
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:19:06.969781+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:11:12.832829
License: Public Domain

*1370IRWIN, Justice
(dissenting).
The majority opinion states that “the issue for us in this case is the present and the future of products liability litigation in Oklahoma”, and discusses in detail the practical applications raised by the adoption of strict liability in the areas of limitation, defenses, parties, proofs, etc.
In my opinion, decisional law concerning manufacturers’ products liability would be better developed by resolving issues presented in each particular case and we should not determine in this case issues neither presented nor necessary to decide. My opinion is in harmony with Edwards v. Hanna Lumber Company, Okl., 415 P.2d 980; Eberle v. State ex rel. Department of Highways, Okl., 385 P.2d 868; In Re Fletcher’s Estate, Okl., 308 P.2d 304; and cases of similar import which, in effect, support the proposition that this Court on appeal will not determine abstract questions of law.
I agree that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed but I would affirm such judgment under our present de-cisional law.
I respectfully dissent.
I am authorized to state that Chief Justice DAVISON concurs in the views herein expressed.