Follow Us

Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Commercial Law Litigation Products Liability

Will the CT Supreme Court Reinvent Design Defect Law?

Part Two of a Two-Part Article
A continuation of the discussion regarding the fact that the Connecticut Supreme Court is currently considering whether the state should abandon its traditional strict product liability standard for design defect claims and replace it with section 2(b) of the Restatement (Third) of Torts, which requires plaintiffs to prove the manufacturer's foreseeability of harm, and prove the effectiveness of a reasonable alternative design in order to recover damages for product-caused injuries.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Editor’s Note: Last month, the authors noted with dismay the fact that the Connecticut Supreme Court is currently considering whether the state should abandon its traditional strict product liability standard for design defect claims and replace it with section 2(b) of the Restatement (Third) of Torts, which requires plaintiffs to prove the manufacturer’s foreseeability of harm, and prove the effectiveness of a reasonable alternative design in order to recover damages for product-caused injuries. See Bifolck v. Philip Morris, Inc. (FEDB-CV-060001768-S (Connecticut Supreme Court docket for Bifolck); see also Restatement (Third) of Torts, Products Liability § 2(b) (Am. Law Inst.). They conclude their discussion herein.

To continue reading,
become a free ALM digital reader

Benefits include:

*May exclude premium content

Read These Next