Court Opinion

ID: 9507019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:17:12.585854+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:13.211528
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE HASWELL,
dissenting.
I would vacate the summary judgment and remand the case for trial on the merits.
My disagreement with the majority is on the facts, not upon the law. Admittedly the record is barren of direct testimonial proof that the defect existed at the time the saw left the hands of defendants. However, in my view the record supports an inference that it did. Proof of a defect in the product may be made through inferences drawn from circumstantial evidence as well as by object evidence. Barich v. Ottenstror, 170 Mont. 38, 550 P.2d 395; Kober & Kyriss v. Billings Deac. Hosp., 148 Mont. 117, 417 P.2d 476; Brandenberger v. Toyota Motor Sales, 162 Mont. 506, 513 P.2d 268. Because this inference must be weighed against opposing evidence to determine where the truth lies, this case presents a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment in my opinion.