Case Problem Analysis: Product Liability

Apply It: Product Liability

Total points: $\frac{-}{15}$

Attempts left: $2$

John Hall tried to unclog a floor drain in the kitchen of the restaurant where he worked. He used a drain cleaner called Zap's Blue Lye that contained crystalline sodium hydroxide $($the chemical name for lye$).$ The product label said to wear eye protection, to put one tablespoon of lye directly into the drain, and to keep one's face away from the drain because there could be dangerous backsplash. Without eye protection, Hall mixed three tablespoons of the lye with water and poured that mixture down the drain while bending over it$.$ Liquid splashed back into his face, causing injury.

He brought a product liability suit based on design defect and inadequate warning. At trial, an expert for Hall stated that the product was defective because it had a tendency to backsplash. Witnesses for the company testified that lye is the most effective chemical drain cleaner and that there is no way to create an effective drain cleaner with lye and eliminate the risk of backsplash. The company executives testified that this

To prove a design defect, Hall must prove:

There was select answer $-$ design

The decision of the manufacturer to not adopt the design was select answer

According to the witness for the company, there a reasonable alternative design for the cleaner. If there is no alternative design for the product, most courts will engage in a select answer $-$ of the product. In this case, the court agreed with the company