Rix v. General Motors Corp case brief
Facts: Rix was injured when the pickup he was driving was hit from behind by a General Motors cab which was equipped with a water tank after sale. Plaintiff sued GM for strict liability; jury verdict for defendant.
Rix said he was injured by an unreasonably dangerous cab which was placed in stream of commerce by GM. It was unreasonably dangerous because of its manufacturing and design defect. The defect he talks about is brake failure; experts testified that brake tube was negligently made and designed. GM says that tube was altered after it left the GM line so defective tube was not their problem; and they say that the accident would have occurred whether or not brake was properly made. Question of whether jury instructions were good. ALSO argued that double brake line is needed
Decision: reversed and remanded for a new trial for other reasons than strict liability
Reasoning: They said that the instructions were good because what strict liability requires is that the product that consumer bought must be flawed because it is misconstructed without regard to whether design of manufacturer was safe or not. That defect has to be a mishap in manufacturing itself or because defective materials were used.