The IDDR Approach and Product Liability. While replacing screws in a gutter, John Baugh fell off a ladder and landed headfirst on his concrete driveway. He sustained a severe brain injury, which permanently limited his ability to perform routine physical and intellectual functions. He filed a suit in a federal district court against Cuprum S.A. de C.V., the company that designed and made the ladder, alleging a design defect under product liability theories. Baugh weighed nearly 200 pounds, which was the stated weight limit on this ladder. Kevin Smith, a mechanical engineer, testified on Baugh’s behalf that the gusset (bracket) on the ladder’s right front side was too short to support Baugh’s weight. This caused the ladder’s leg to fail and Baugh to fall. In Smith’s opinion, a longer gusset would have prevented the accident. Cuprum argued that the accident occurred because Baugh climbed too high on the ladder and stood on its fourth step and pail shelf, neither of which were intended for the purpose. No other person witnessed Baugh using the ladder prior to his fall, however, so there was no evidence to support Cuprum’s argument. [ Baugh v. Cuprum S.A. de C.V., 845 F.3d 838 (7th Cir. 2017)]

1.What is a manufacturer’s legal and ethical duty when designing and making products for consumers? Did Cuprum meet this standard? Discuss.

2.Did the mechanical engineer’s testimony establish that a reasonable alternative design was available for Cuprum’s ladder? Explain.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

1 It was the manufacturers obligation to take into account the fair working practise... View the full answer