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

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

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.

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

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