Fred Henry - Page 15




                                        - 15 -                                         

                         a.  The Defendant negligently formulated the                  
               product in such a way that it was hazardous to plant                    
               life.                                                                   
                         b.  The Defendant negligently failed to                       
               manufacture the product and/or supervise the manufac-                   
               ture of the product so as to render it safe for use on                  
               plants.                                                                 
                         c.  The Defendant negligently failed to test                  
               and analyze Benlate to determine whether it was, in                     
               fact, safe for use on plants.                                           
                         d.  The Defendant contaminated the Benlate or                 
               allowed it to be contaminated by third persons so as to                 
               render it hazardous to plants.                                          
                         e.  The Defendant failed to take the proper                   
               precautions to see to it that the Benlate was in a safe                 
               and proper condition for use on plants.                                 
                         f.  The dangerous chemical properties of                      
               Benlate were known to the Defendant for a sufficient                    
               length of time prior to the sale of the product to the                  
               Plaintiffs such that the Defendant was negligent in                     
               failing to stop the sale of Benlate.                                    
                    21.  As a direct and proximate result of the                       
               negligence of the Defendant, Du PONT, the Plaintiffs,                   
               FRED HENRY and DONNA HENRY d/b/a FRED HENRY'S PARADISE                  
               OF ORCHIDS, have suffered and continue to suffer lost                   
               profits, loss of business, loss of business reputation,                 
               loss of the reputation of FRED HENRY and DONNA HENRY as                 
               orchid growers, diminution of sales, incurred addi-                     
               tional business expenses, have had a reduction in the                   
               value of the business, have lost plants, have suffered                  
               a diminution in the value of their nursery as a result                  
               of chemical contamination of the soil, and have suf-                    
               fered other consequential losses and damages.                           
                    WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs, FRED HENRY and DONNA                    
               HENRY d/b/a FRED HENRY'S PARADISE OF ORCHIDS, demand                    
               judgment against the Defendant, Du PONT, including                      
               interest and costs and demand trial by jury of all                      
               issues triable as of right by jury.                                     







Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011