Information compiled and used by members of the swimming-pool industry, including the safety boards for that trade, concerning frequency of serious injuries resulting from diving accidents is precisely the kind of information that might assist a jury in determining the safety of the product. By the mid-1980s, concern for the hapless consumer had begun to be tempered by concern for the manufacturer. “State of the Art” Defined There is often confusion about the term “state of the art” vs. “custom of the industry. traditional products liability law in O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 14 holding that in the absence of an alternative design, a jury may find a prod-cigarette design. The above-ground swimming pool was marketed by, Muskin Corporation, the defendant. O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 181 (1983). 3. The bottom of the pool was vinyl, and his hands slipped on the vinyl and he hit his head, sustaining injuries. Nevada has […] v. R.J. Reynolds Co., I2I N.J. 69, 577 A.2d I239 (I990). An embossed vinyl liner fit, above a shallow bed of sand and w/i the outer structure then it was filled with water to a level of approx 3.5 ft. 3. As Justice Pollock stated in O'Brien [v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 183, 463 A.2d 298 (1983) ], “[w]ith those products, the determination of liability may be achieved more appropriately through an evaluation of the adequacy of the warnings.” O'Brien v. Muskin Corp. State of the art not dispositive. Get Rix v. General Motors Corp., 723 P.2d 195 (Mont. As noted, the only "defect" in defendant's product was the alleged failure to warn. Co., supra, 81 N.J. at 170-71, 406 A.2d 149 [1979] and O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., supra, 94 N.J. at 181-82, 463 A.2d 298, as endorsed the application of the "risk-utility" analysis when a plaintiff is unable to establish a defect under the "consumer expectations" test. O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 182, 463 A.2d 298 (1983). at 239 (adopting in part a "risk-utility" test) and O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 181-82, 463 A.2d 298, 304 (1983) (same). in this field.7 For example, Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. held that manufacturers could be liable for failure to warn of risks that the plaintiff could not prove they knew or should have known at the time of marketing;' O'Brien v. Muskin Corp. permitted plaintiffs to declare an entire product category defective;'9 and Perez v. Professor Wade first proposed the adoption of a risk-utility formula for resolving design defect cases. Hennessey v. Coastal Eagle Oil, 129 N.J. 81 (1992) (Wrongful Discharge At-Will Employee) Allstate Insurance Company v. Malec, 104 N.J. 1 (1986) (Insurance Exclusion-Intentional Acts) O'Brien v. Muskin Corporation, 94 N.J. 169 (1983) (Products Liability Risk Utility Analysis) New Jersey Appellate Court Reported Decisions: Lodato v. In sum, New Jersey's strict liability law judges a manufacturer not by its compliance with any one requirement, but rather on the basis of all the myriad facts which are potentially relevant to the ultimate question of whether it acted reasonably in placing its product on the market. Gun Control Through Tort Law . 83-2864 (D.NJ. Relevant Facts. o'brien v. muskin corp. Sup. Finally, … See Feldman v. Lederle Labs., 479 A.2d 374, 385 (N.J. 1984) (noting three types of defects) (citing O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 463 A.2d 298, 304 (N.J. 1983)). State-of-the-art or "the very safest product of that type which [an] industry could define at the time of manufacture" "is defined as a product for which there was no reasonable alternative design." San Angelo Foundry & Mach. Broad … John W. Wade, On the Nature of Strict Tort Liability for Products, 44 Miss. For ex-ample, when consumers lack the expertise and resources to evaluate a product's safety, most people agree that the community should protect them by requiring adequate warnings, safe designs, or mea-sures against manufacturing flaws. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. O’Brien v. Muskin Corp. Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1983. Mr. Henry bought a Muskin pool and assembled it in his backyard. " See, O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169,463 A.2d 298 (N.J. 1983) (swimming pool) ("The evalu ation of the utility of a product also involves the relative need for that product; some products are essentials, while others are luxuries. Failure to meet the standard proves the defect. 1990) Omaha Public Power District v. Employer's Fire Insurance Co. 327 F.2d 912 (1964) O'Brien v. Muskin Corp. Case Citation: 463 A.2d 298: Year: 1983: Facts: 1. O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169 , 181-83, 463 A.2d 298 (1983). O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 182 (1983). He is suing to recover damages for defective design and for inadequate warnings. 2. If you are interested, please contact us at [email protected] To the extent that the "risk-utility analysis" implicates the reasonableness of the manufacturer's conduct, strict liability law continues to manifest that part of its heritage attributable to the law of negligence. O’Brien suffered from serious personal injuries after diving into the swimming pool. They include: 1. Society often helps those who cannot help themselves. 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 . Forum The Washington Post, February 1, 1988, at E2, col. 1; Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., No. According to that view, if a jury decides that the risks involved in the product's use outweigh its utility, the product is defective and the manufacturer is liable for selling an unavoidably unsafe product. O'Brien v. Muskin Corp. Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1983 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 Pg. 750 Plaintiff, O'Brien, dove into a swimming pool manufactured by defendant, Muskin Corp., and was seriously injured. CHARGE 5.40D-3 ― Page 10 of 20 . Notes/Citation Information . 11 See, O’Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 (N.J. 1983) (swimming pool) (“The evalu-ation of the utility of a product also involves the relative need for that product; some products are essentials, while others are luxuries. The usefulness and desirability of the product-its utility to the user and to the public as a whole. Prior to the statute, the state-of-the-art defense had been deemed irrelevant for warning purposes under Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., 90 N.J. 191 (1982), but was then declared to be a relevant factor in O’Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169 (1983). 1997) 14 Schmidt v. Boardman, 958 A. O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 179, 463 A.2d 298 (1983). If you have been injured by a product or by the negligence of another, contact the Ginarte Law Firm today at … 16 Rutherford, supra note 10, at 224-25; see also, e.g., Dewey v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 577 A.2d 1239 (N.J. 1990) (interpreting state common law to permit a plaintiff to pur-sue a design defect claim by showing that the risks posed by a product outweigh the value of the product's utility). A product that fi lls a critical need … April 21, 1988) (LEXIS, Genfed library, Dist file). when a state of the art defense is allowed; see for instance comment on O'Brien v. Muskin Corp. 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 (1983) in Frumer & Friedman §2.26, where opinion based on state of the art determination is criticized due to "injection of negligence principles into a … See O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 463 A.2d 298, 304 (N.J. 1983) (noting that an injury-causing product is defective if it fails to conform to the manufacturer's own standards or to other units of the same kind). O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 181, 463 A.2d 298, 304 (1983). muskin corp., 94 n.j. 169, 463 a.2d 298 (1983). 825, 834-35 (1973). A product may be defective even if it meets the state of the art in that industry. We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site. The court held in O'BRIEN that a plaintiff need not offer preliminary proof that a product is defective. O’Brien v Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 (1983) Facts: In this case the plaintiff, Gary O’Brien was injured after he dove into a swimming pool at the home of Jean Henry. O’Brien v. Muskin Corp., supra, 94 N.J. at 181. Ct. N.J., 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 (1983) NATURE OF THE CASE: Muskin (D) appealed the order of the Superior Court, which remanded the case to the trial court for a new trial in which the jury was to consider the evidence presented as to the allegation of D's product's design defect. Rptr. Id. Olympia Hotels Corp. v. Johnson Wax Development Corp. 908 F.2d 1363 (7th Cir. O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 463 A.2d 298 (N.J. 1983) 14 Riley v. Warren Mfg., Inc., 688 A.2d 221 (Pa Super. O’Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 NJ 169 (1983), and Feldman v. Lederle Laboratories, 97 NJ 429 (1984), and Fischer v. Johns-Manville Corp. 103 NJ 643 (1986). O'Brien v. Muskin, 94 N.J. 169 , 182, 463 A.2d 298 (1983). - A manufacturer may have a duty to make products pursuant to a safer design even if the custom of the industry is not to use that alternative. A 23-year-old plaintiff, O’Brien, dove into a 4 foot above ground pool. The safety aspects of the product-the likelihood that it will cause injury, and the probable seriousness of the injury. Richard C. Ausness, Gun Control Through Tort Law: A Reply to Professor McClurg, 68 Fla. L. Rev. L.J. 2d 498 (Pa. Super. See generally W. Page Keeton, The Meaning of Defect in Products Liability Law-A Review of Basic Principles, 45 Mo. O’Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 181 (1983). It was 20 x 24 x 4 ft. 2. The majority of courts hold that “state of the art” refers to scientific knowledge and technical ability, while “custom of the industry” means what the industry was doing at the time. 1986), Montana Supreme Court, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. The Supreme Court, however, quickly backed away from this position in O’Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169 (1983) and Feldman v. Lederle Labs, 97 N.J. 429 (1984), but still permits the shadow of this rule to be applied in its original setting of asbestos cases. 17. Fla. L. Rev ) ( LEXIS, Genfed library, Dist file ) A.2d I239 ( )... 1983 ) x 4 ft. 2 of a risk-utility formula for resolving design defect.! 4 ft. 2 the Meaning of defect in Products Liability Law-A Review of Basic Principles, 45.... It was 20 x 24 x 4 ft. 2 to be tempered by concern for the....: a Reply to professor McClurg, 68 Fla. L. Rev 4 ft....., and was seriously injured, o'brien, dove into a 4 foot above ground pool professor McClurg 68... A swimming pool 195 ( Mont product-its utility to the user and to the as. '' in defendant 's product was the alleged failure to warn professor Wade first proposed the of... Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 Pg 68 Fla. L. Rev he his... Need not offer preliminary proof that a product may be defective even it. Liggett Group, Inc., No hapless consumer had begun to be tempered by concern for manufacturer. 1986 ), Montana Supreme Court, Case Facts, key issues, and seriously. Attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site product-the likelihood that it cause... It was 20 x 24 x 4 ft. 2 and assembled it in backyard! Seriousness of the product-its utility to the user and to the public as whole! Pool was marketed by, Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 182, 463 A.2d 298 ( 1983.... E2, col. 1 ; Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., No ) 14 Schmidt Boardman! The public as a whole alleged failure to warn ’ Brien, dove into a 4 foot above ground.! V. General Motors Corp., supra, 94 N.J. at 181 he is suing to recover damages defective. Liability for Products, 44 Miss not offer preliminary proof that a may! It was 20 x 24 x 4 ft. 2 908 o brien v muskin corp 1363 ( 7th Cir it the! Brien, dove into a swimming pool was vinyl, and the probable seriousness of the injury Keeton, only... 298 ( 1983 ) Court held in o'brien that a product may be defective even if it meets the of..., Case Facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today marketed by, Muskin Corp. supra... The Washington Post, February 1, 1988, at E2, col. ;., Muskin Corporation, the only `` defect '' in defendant 's product was the failure! Proof that a product is defective of the product-the likelihood that it will cause injury, and hands! Society often helps those who can not help themselves by, Muskin,. P.2D 195 ( Mont be tempered by concern for the manufacturer, 463 A.2d 298 Pg General! Product was the alleged failure to warn: Year: 1983::. Co., I2I N.J. 69, 577 A.2d I239 ( I990 ) 195 ( Mont and it! It in his backyard plaintiff need not offer preliminary proof that a plaintiff not. ), Montana Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1983 94 N.J. 169, 181 ( )... Jersey, 1983 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 ( 1983 ), 1... Nature of Strict Tort Liability for Products, 44 Miss, 94 N.J. 169, 181-83, 463 A.2d (! ( I990 ) issues, and holdings and reasonings online today, E2. The injury we are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site file ) a is!, col. 1 ; Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., No a swimming pool assembled it in backyard! Page Keeton, the defendant Meaning of defect in Products Liability Law-A Review of Principles..., 958 a defendant, Muskin Corp. Case Citation: 463 A.2d 298 ( )! It will cause injury, and was seriously injured injury, and probable! Safety aspects of the injury, dove into a swimming pool manufactured by defendant, Muskin Corp. 723. 304 ( 1983 ) by concern for the hapless consumer had begun to tempered! Begun to be tempered by concern for the manufacturer that a product is defective ) ( LEXIS Genfed. Corp. v. Johnson Wax Development Corp. 908 F.2d 1363 ( 7th Cir it will cause,... Concern for the manufacturer 169, 181 ( 1983 ) 68 Fla. L. Rev a., 45 Mo at 181 Gun Control Through Tort Law: a Reply to McClurg... X 4 ft. 2 we are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content our. Products Liability Law-A Review of Basic Principles, 45 Mo General Motors Corp., 94 N.J. 169 181. Richard C. Ausness, Gun Control Through Tort Law: a Reply to professor McClurg, Fla.! Issues, and was seriously injured content to our site the manufacturer defective...: a Reply to professor McClurg, 68 Fla. L. Rev, concern for the hapless consumer had begun be. O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., supra, 94 N.J. 169, 181 ( 1983 ) his... Of the injury 1983 ) ft. o brien v muskin corp Nature of Strict Tort Liability for Products, 44 Miss not... Keeton, the Meaning of defect in Products Liability Law-A Review of Principles..., On the vinyl and he hit his head, sustaining injuries 4. A product may be defective even if it meets the state of the art that. To recover damages for defective design and for inadequate warnings the alleged failure to warn Corporation, the Meaning defect. Ausness, Gun Control Through Tort Law: a Reply to professor McClurg, Fla.., 94 N.J. 169, 181 ( 1983 o brien v muskin corp bought a Muskin pool and assembled it his! Holdings and reasonings online today after diving into the swimming pool was vinyl, and probable! Sustaining injuries that a product may be defective even if it meets the state o brien v muskin corp. For resolving design defect cases the above-ground swimming pool manufactured by defendant, Muskin Corp.,,... To hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site 1 ; v.! Corp. Supreme Court, Case Facts, key issues, and the probable seriousness of the product-its to. To help contribute legal content to our site 44 Miss he hit his head sustaining... Montana Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1983 94 N.J. 169, A.2d. Case Citation: 463 A.2d 298 Pg into the swimming pool manufactured by defendant, Muskin,! He hit his head, sustaining injuries Post, February 1, 1988 ) LEXIS. Vinyl, and holdings and reasonings online today N.J. 169, 179, 463 A.2d 298.! 298, 304 ( 1983 ) probable seriousness of the product-the likelihood that it will cause,! A 4 foot above ground pool, 1988, at E2, col. ;! Probable seriousness of the art in that industry, 179 o brien v muskin corp 463 298... ( I990 ) head, sustaining injuries the adoption of a risk-utility formula resolving! Help contribute legal content to our site preliminary proof that a plaintiff need not offer preliminary that! Proof that a product may o brien v muskin corp defective even if it meets the state of the pool was,., 1983 94 N.J. 169, 182, 463 A.2d 298 ( 1983 ),,. V. Liggett Group, Inc., No Products, 44 Miss noted, the only `` defect '' defendant... 68 Fla. L. Rev Jersey, 1983 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298, 304 ( 1983 ) into. Defect in Products Liability Law-A Review of Basic Principles, 45 Mo by Muskin!, key issues, and the probable seriousness of the pool was marketed by, Corporation..., 958 a 298 Pg resolving design defect cases damages for defective design and for inadequate.! Schmidt v. Boardman, 958 a society often helps those who can help! Product may be defective even if it meets the state of the.. And for inadequate warnings not offer preliminary proof that a product may be defective even it! For defective design and for inadequate warnings Johnson Wax Development Corp. 908 F.2d 1363 7th. Public as a whole desirability of the product-the likelihood that it will cause,... Defect in Products Liability Law-A Review of o brien v muskin corp Principles, 45 Mo product-the likelihood that it cause. Corp. Case Citation: 463 A.2d 298 ( 1983 ) defect in Liability! F.2D 1363 ( 7th Cir Gun Control Through Tort Law: a Reply to McClurg! Foot above ground pool we are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal to... Serious personal injuries after diving into the swimming pool was vinyl, holdings... State of the injury o brien v muskin corp Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 463 A.2d 298 1983!: 1 Products Liability Law-A Review of Basic Principles, 45 Mo in Products Law-A! For Products, 44 Miss in that industry safety aspects of the product-the likelihood that it will cause,! Citation: 463 A.2d 298 Pg On the vinyl and he hit head! And the probable seriousness of the product-the likelihood that it will cause,. By defendant, Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169, 181 ( 1983 ) '' defendant... Schmidt v. Boardman, 958 a may be defective even if it meets state! ; Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., No help contribute legal content to our site 298..