ClickCease

Product Defect Case Series

Fyssakis v. Knight Equip. Corp., 108 Nev. 212, 826 P.2d 570 (1992).

Product: Dishwashing soap and soap dispenser.

Injury: Blindness.

Mechanism of Injury: When soap gets in your eyes.

Nature of Defect: Failure to warn regarding the soap.  Failure to include a safety feature regarding the dispenser.

Jury Verdict: Summary judgment for the defendant on the strict liability claims.

Issue on appeal: #Warning #SafetyFeature

Product Defect Law Categories:

Result: Reversed and remanded.

Case Quotes:

To bring successfully a strict products liability claim, a plaintiff must show that: 1) the product had a defect which rendered it unreasonably dangerous, 2) the defect existed at the time the product left the manufacturer, and 3) the defect caused the plaintiff's injury. Ginnis v. Mapes Hotel Corp., 86 Nev. 408, 470 P.2d 135 (1970).

Fyssakis v. Knight Equip. Corp., 108 Nev. 212, 214, 826 P.2d 570, 571 (1992)

 

 


Under Nevada law, a product must include a warning  that adequately communicates the dangers that may result from its use or foreseeable misuse; otherwise, the product is defective. Oak Grove Inv. v. Bell & Gossett Co., 99 Nev. 616, 668 P.2d 1075 (1983). Since it is not clear that the soap's warning adequately communicated that the soap could cause blindness, we conclude that Fyssakis has raised a genuine issue of fact as to whether the soap was defective.

Fyssakis v. Knight Equip. Corp., 108 Nev. 212, 214, 826 P.2d 570, 571-72 (1992)

 


Second, we conclude that Fyssakis has raised a genuine issue of fact regarding an alleged defect in the dispenser. Specifically, Fyssakis presented a safety expert's affidavit stating that the safety switch on the dispenser could be bypassed by tilting the dispenser at a certain angle. Additionally, the expert stated that the dispenser could have been designed with a safer shrouding mechanism. Under Nevada law, evidence that a product lacked adequate safety features or that a safer alternative design was feasible at the time of manufacture will support a strict liabilities claim. Robinson v. G.G.C. Inc., 107 Nev. 135, 808 P.2d 522 (1991); McCourt v. J.C. Penney Co., 103 Nev. 101, 734 P.2d 696 (1987). The affidavit of Fyssakis' safety expert has thus *215 raised a genuine issue of fact regarding a defect in the dispenser.

Fyssakis v. Knight Equip. Corp., 108 Nev. 212, 214-15, 826 P.2d 570, 572 (1992)

 


Under Nevada law, evidence that a product lacked adequate safety features or that a safer alternative design was feasible at the time of manufacture will support a strict liabilities claim. Robinson v. G.G.C. Inc., 107 Nev. 135, 808 P.2d 522 (1991); McCourt v. J.C. Penney Co., 103 Nev. 101, 734 P.2d 696 (1987).

Fyssakis v. Knight Equip. Corp., 108 Nev. 212, 214, 826 P.2d 570, 572 (1992)

Clear Counsel Law group

Contact Info

1671 W Horizon Ridge Pkwy Suite 200,
Henderson, NV 89012

+1 702 522 0696
info@clearcounsel.com

Daily: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm
Saturday & Sunday: By Appointment Only

Copyright 2019 Clear Counsel Law Group® | Nav Map

Nothing on this site is legal advice.