Report of the Dairy Commissioner of the State of New Jersey . 1887. Trenton, State. 8°

Science ◽  
1888 ◽  
Vol ns-11 (278) ◽  
pp. 264-265
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
The State

Advancements in the Management of Dredged Material in the State of New Jersey

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas A. Gaffney ◽  
Edward S. Gorleski ◽  
Genevieve Boehm Clifton
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
The State ◽  
Dredged Material

TWELVE-SPOTTED ASPARAGUS BEETLE IN CONNECTICUT

1903 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 188-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. E. Britton
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
Introduced Species ◽  
The State ◽  
New Haven ◽  
Male And Female

Crioceris12-punctata, Linn, is an introduced species, and has been working northward from Maryland, according to Professor J.B. Smith, who some time ago informed me that it was present in New Jersey, and would in time reach Connecticut. The first speciment recorded from the State was taken by a student assistant June, 16th, 1902, who collected a single speciment on asparagus upon the Station grounds in New Haven. On May 23rd, 1903, I took male and female specimens from the same locality. We may now expect this species to become thoroughly established here as a pest of asparagus, beetle, C. asparagi, Linn.

Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp.: The Function of State of the Art Evidence in Strict Products Liability

1984 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Berman
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
The State ◽  
Health Hazards ◽  
Products Liability ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Liability Claims

AbstractIn Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a state of the art defense is unavailable in cases brought under a theory of strict liability for failure to warn. The court indicated that asbestos producers may be held liable for their products' harms even if the health hazards of asbestos were unknown and not discoverable when the products were marketed. In a subsequent case, the New Jersey court held that state of the art evidence is relevant to whether a product is defective. This Case Comment examines these different uses of knowledge evidence in the disposition of products liability cases. It contends that manufacturers should not be held liable for unknowable risks. The Comment concludes that the state of the art defense establishes a logical limit on strict liability and promotes efficient resolution of products liability claims.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document