Should a Non-Designing Manufacturer Be Held Strictly Liable for a Design Defect? An Approach for California

Authors

Brent Nicholas Triff

Library of Congress Authority File

http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n79122466

Document Type

Comments

Abstract

This Comment recommends how the California Supreme Court should handle a situation in which a manufacturer conforms to the buyer’s design in building a product, and then the product causes injury to a person because of a design defect. The California Supreme Court has not addressed whether the manufacturer in such situation should be held strictly liable. The approaches in two other jurisdictions are analyzed to illustrate how well each approximates the goals behind tort liability. The “Nebraska Rule” finds a non-designing manufacturer liable for a design defect only upon proof of that the manufacturer was at fault for following the buyer’s design. Conversely, the “New Jersey Rule” holds a non-designing manufacturer strictly liable for a design defect regardless of fault. The Author recommends that the California Supreme Court adopt the rationale of the Nebraska Rule because it is more compatible with California’s current strict liability standards.

Recommended Citation

Brent N. Triff, Should a Non-Designing Manufacturer Be Held Strictly Liable for a Design Defect? An Approach for California, 33 San Diego L. Rev. 385 (1996).
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol33/iss1/8