Denny v. Ford Motor Co.

• Decision Date: 19 March 1996
• Docket Number: D,No. 1671,1671
• Parties: Prod.Liab.Rep. (CCH) P 14,537 Nancy DENNY and Robert Denny, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. ocket 93-7815.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Page 12

79 F.3d 12

Prod.Liab.Rep. (CCH) P 14,537

Nancy DENNY and Robert Denny, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 1671, Docket 93-7815.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued April 27, 1994.

Decided March 19, 1996.

Appeal from a judgment entered after a jury trial in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (McAvoy, Judge). Appellant claims that the jury verdicts are inconsistent and that it is therefore entitled to judgment in its favor, or, in the alternative, to a new trial. Because the New York Court of Appeals has determined that the breach of warranty claim is not subsumed within a strict products liability claim, we affirm.

John H. Beisner, O'Melveny & Myers, Washington, DC (Brian D. Boyle; Brian P. Crosby, Gibson, McAskill & Crosby, Buffalo, New York, of counsel), for Defendant-Appellant.

Paul McAloon, New York City (John Scarzafava, Oneonta, New York; Russell L. Cook, Jr., Cook & Butler, Houston, Texas, of counsel), for Plaintiffs-Appellees.

Before: VAN GRAAFEILAND and WINTER, Circuit Judges, and MISHLER, District Judge. ^*

PER CURIAM:

In an earlier decision, we certified questions of law to the New York Court of Appeals pursuant to Art. VI, § 3(b)(9) of the New York Constitution, after resolving certain federal procedural issues. See Denny v. Ford Motor Co., 42 F.3d 106 (2d Cir.1994). The New York Court of Appeals has answered the questions, Denny v. Ford Motor Co., 87 N.Y.2d 248, 639 N.Y.S.2d 250, 662 N.E.2d 730 (1995), leaving open the issue of whether the jury's verdicts are reconcilable under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a). Id., 639 N.Y.S.2d at 259, 662 N.E.2d at 736. Familiarity with our earlier opinion and with the recent decision of the New York Court of Appeals is assumed.

Until the New York Court of Appeals' decision was rendered, Ford's staunch position has been that strict products liability and breach of implied warranty claims are identical under New York law and that the jury's verdicts for Ford on a strict products liability theory and for Denny on a breach of implied warranty theory were, therefore, inconsistent verdicts calling either for judgment in its favor or for a new trial. By letter brief, Ford continues to argue that the verdicts are inconsistent under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a), notwithstanding the New York Court of Appeals decision that the two claims involve different elements and that the breach of warranty...