FACTS: The mechanic was injured when a can of compressed gas product produced and bottled by the chemical corporation exploded upon normal usage.
The mechanic's evidence showed that the product was not fit for use. The trial court adequately charged the jury on the issue of contributory fault, and the trial court properly refused a subsequent request by the chemical corporation to again charge the jury on the issue. The trial court properly excluded evidence of improper actions taken by the mechanic on prior occasions because such evidence was not probative of what the mechanic did on the day in question.
CONCLUSION: The court affirmed the trial court's interlocutory judgment.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?