This case was last updated from PACER on 08/17/2021 at 08:43:54 (UTC).

Sodexo, Inc. v. NutriTower, Inc.

Case Summary

On June 18, 2021, Sodexo, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “Sodexo”), represented by Mahan V. Wright of Litchfield Cavo LLP filed a product liability lawsuit against NutriTower, Inc. (“Defendant” or “NutriTower”), seeking damages, prejudgment and postjudgment interest along with costs for NutriTower’s alleged improper and defective design and manufacture of the gardening system and its component parts, including the pump. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court in the Western District of Texas.

 

In its complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that, “Sodexo manages, which includes ordering, preparing and serving, of food within, the dining facilities at The University of Texas’ Austin, Texas location. In June of 2019, Sodexo purchased one of the Nutritower gardening systems and placed it in a dining hall located on the UT campus in Austin, Texas. On June 19, 2019, the gardening system’s water pump failed and caught fire (the “Fire”) in the cafeteria. The room was soon fully engulfed in smoke from the fire, which caused damages in excess of $100,000.00.” 

 

The Plaintiff further alleged that “A joint examination of the gardening system was conducted on or about July 25, 2019. It was determined that the gardening system’s pump did not contain fail-safe features, including but not limited to, a float valve which would shut off power to the pump in the event it ran dry, or an inline GFCI that would turn off the pump when, and if, it overheated. The lack of these common safety measures caused the Fire. The Fire and Plaintiff’s damages occurred as a direct and proximate result of Defendant NutriTower’s improper and defective design and manufacture of the gardening system and its component parts, including the pump.”

 

The Plaintiff also alleged that “Defendant knew or should have known that the pump was defective as inspection and/or testing of the pump would have reasonably revealed the product did not function as designed and/or intended and was susceptible to failure. Defendant also breached its duty by failing to adopt a safer, practical, feasible or otherwise reasonable alternative design that could have prevented or substantially reduced the risk of harm without substantially impairing the usefulness, practicality, or desirability of the gardening system.”

 

There are three claims for relief laid down by the Plaintiff. The first is for alleged negligence; the second is for strict liability for an allegedly defective product; the third is for alleged breach of implied warranty. 

 

In its prayer for relief, the Plaintiff requested the Court to enter judgment in its favor and against Defendant for all resulting damages, with prejudgment interest at the legal rate, post-judgment interest at the legal rate, court costs, and for such other and further relief, both at law and in equity, to which Plaintiff may show itself to be justly entitled.

 

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.



Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    1:21-CV-00538

  • Filing Date:

    06/18/2021

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Property - Personal Property Product Liability

  • Courthouse:

    Texas Western District

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

Lee Yeakel

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

Sodexo, Inc.

Defendant

NutriTower, Inc.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

Mahan V. Wright

Attorney at Litchfield Cavo LLP

100 Throckmorton Street, Suite 500

Fort Worth, TX 76102

Susan Jan Hueber

Attorney at Litchfield Cavo, LLP

100 Throckmorton Street, Suite 500

Fort Worth, TX 76102

 

Court Documents

1 #1

Civil Cover Sheet

#1

(#1) COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0542-14929773), filed by Sodexo, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Wright, Mahan) (Entered: 06/18/2021)

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/18/2021
  • DocketDEMAND for Trial by Jury by Sodexo, Inc.. (dl) (Entered: 06/21/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2021
  • DocketIf ordered by the court, all referrals and consents in this case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Magistrate Docket 4. (dl) (Entered: 06/21/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2021
  • DocketCase assigned to Judge Lee Yeakel. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (dl) (Entered: 06/21/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0542-14929773), filed by Sodexo, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Wright, Mahan) (Entered: 06/18/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where Sodexo, Inc. is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Susan Jan Hueber