Sierocinski (P) was injured while crimping a dynamite cap manufactured by E.I.Du Pont (D). P sued D, and the complaint alleged that P was injured by a premature explosion of a dynamite cap. P claimed negligent manufacturing and distributing of the cap in such a fashion that it was unable to withstand the crimping that D knew it would be subjected to. D moved to strike as the amended complaint failed to set forth any specific act of negligence. The court dismissed the action. P appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.