# Dippel v. Sciano

> Wisconsin Supreme Court · December 29, 1967 · 37 Wis. 2d 443

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9580430

## Case

- **Full name:** Dippel, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Sciano and Wife, D/B/A Tony & Dottie’s Tavern and Others, Defendants : Pioneer Sales & Service, Inc., Respondent
- **Court:** Wisconsin Supreme Court
- **Decided:** December 29, 1967
- **Citations:** 37 Wis. 2d 443; 155 N.W.2d 55; 4 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 1033; 1967 Wisc. LEXIS 985
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Currie
- **Judges:** Currie, Hallows
- **Cited by:** 233 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9580430

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- observing that Restatement (Second) § 402A “is supplemented by several comments that can be helpful in construing the rule when applying it to an individual factual situation”

## Opinion text

Currie, C. J.
(concurring). I fully concur in the court’s opinion. This opinion makes it crystal clear why the rule of strict liability in products-liability cases laid down in sec. 402A of Restatement, 2 Torts 2d, which this court now adopts, is not a rule of absolute liability. This is wholly apart from any consideration of such defenses as contributory negligence or assumption of risk.
Strahlendorf v. Walgreen Co. (1962), 16 Wis. 2d 421 , 114 N. W. 2d 823 , did not turn on the issue of privity, the court holding that the toy was safe when properly used. This was the reason why six of the seven members of the court held it was an inappropriate case in which to consider adopting the rule of the Restatement. More than five years were to elapse before a case did present itself in which it was appropriate to consider the issue, and that occurred with the appeal of the instant order.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9580430. Public record. Not legal advice.