Shields v. Morton Chemical Co., 95 Idaho 674

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court adopted strict liability in tort for products liability actions under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A. It held that contributory negligence based on failure to discover a defect or guard against its existence is not a defense to strict liability, although misuse and knowingly encountering a danger may be defenses. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial because the jury instruction on contributory negligence was confusing and prejudicial when applied to the plaintiff’s negligence, warranty, and strict-liability theories.

Holdings

1. Idaho adopted the doctrine of strict liability in tort as stated in Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A (1965). A seller engaged in the business of selling a product is liable for physical harm caused by a product sold in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user, consumer, or the user's or consumer's property, when the product reaches the user or consumer without substantial change.
2. Contributory negligence consisting merely of failure to discover a product defect or to guard against the possibility of its existence is not a defense to strict liability in tort. Misuse of the product, or voluntarily and unreasonably proceeding in the face of a known danger, may be a defense.
3. The trial court erred by giving a contributory-negligence instruction that was not expressly limited to the negligence theory. Because the instruction could mislead the jury into applying contributory negligence to the breach-of-warranty and strict-liability theories, it was defective and prejudicial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Idaho should adopt strict liability in tort for products-liability actions.
2. Whether contributory negligence based on failure to discover a defect or guard against its existence is a defense to strict liability in tort.
3. Whether the trial court's contributory-negligence instruction was erroneous and prejudicial because it was not limited to the negligence theory.
4. Whether the case should be remanded for a new trial with instructions distinguishing the three theories of liability.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded