Product Defect Case Series

Beattie v. Thomas, 99 Nev. 579, 585, 668 P.2d 268, 272 (1983).

Product:

Injury:

Mechanism of Injury:

Nature of Defect:

Jury Verdict:

Issue on appeal:

Product Defect Law Categories:

Result:

Case Quotes:

In strict tort liability cases, evidence of prior or subsequent mishaps similar to the one in issue, involving the same product, are admissible to show faulty design or manufacture or other elements of the strict liability cause of action. Ginnis v. Mapes Hotel Corp., 86 Nev. 408, 415–16, 470 P.2d 135, 139–40 (1970). See Reiger v. Toboy Enterprises, 45 Or.App. 679, 609 P.2d 402 (1980); Stoltz v. McKowen, 14 Wash.App. 808, 545 P.2d 584 (1976).

Beattie v. Thomas, 99 Nev. 579, 585, 668 P.2d 268, 272 (1983)

However, there is a distinct difference between showing the accident/injury history of a product and the legal history of a product. Many factors influence the filing of a lawsuit, among them the amenability of defendant's insurer to prompt out-of-court settlements. Even if the absence of prior lawsuits concerning a particular product remotely tends to indicate that no substantial defect exists, the prejudicial value and confusing nature of such evidence would seem to outweigh considerably its probative value. Respondent cites no cases holding that the prior legal history of a product is admissible.

Beattie v. Thomas, 99 Nev. 579, 585–86, 668 P.2d 268, 272 (1983)