Perkins v. Wilkinson Sword, Inc.

Perkins v. Wilkinson Sword, Inc.

Under Ohio law and former R.C. 2307.75, the risk-benefit test may be applied to properly functioning disposable cigarette lighters to determine whether feasible alternative designs (such as child-resistant features) would have reduced foreseeable risks to children and whether the benefits of the challenged design outweigh those risks; no statutory or common-law rule limits the risk-benefit test to malfunctioning products.

Citation
1998 Ohio 16; 83 Ohio St. 3d 507
Parties
Petitioner; Administrator of the Estates of Traci, Andrew and Chrystal Perkins: Thomas Lee Perkins; Respondent; Defendant: Wilkinson Sword, Inc.; Respondent; Defendant: Wal-Mart, Inc.
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
United States
Judgment Date
10 November 1998
Case Number
1997-2507
Procedural Posture
Products Liability; Wrongful Death (diversity Jurisdiction) / Certified Question From United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to Ohio Supreme Court
Outcome
Certified question answered in the affirmative: the risk-benefit test may be used to attempt to prove a design defect in a properly functioning disposable cigarette lighter.
Legal Topics
Design Defect, Risk Benefit Test, Consumer Expectation Test, Child Resistant Safety, Certified Question Procedure
Source Language
English
Torts Products Liability Statutory Interpretation Design Defect Risk Benefit Test Consumer Expectation Test Child Resistant Safety Certified Question Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Lee Perkins

Petitioner; Administrator of the Estates of Traci, Andrew and Chrystal Perkins

Wilkinson Sword, Inc.

Respondent; Defendant

Wal-Mart, Inc.

Respondent; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Products Liability; Wrongful Death (diversity Jurisdiction) / Certified Question From United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to Ohio Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the risk-benefit test under former R.C. 2307.75 may be applied to prove a design defect in a properly functioning disposable cigarette lighter
  2. 2 Whether Ohio law requires a product malfunction before application of the risk-benefit test
  3. 3 Whether obvious-danger or unavoidably-unsafe doctrines bar recovery for lighters without child-resistant features

Ratio Decidendi

Under Ohio law and former R.C. 2307.75, the risk-benefit test may be applied to properly functioning disposable cigarette lighters to determine whether feasible alternative designs (such as child-resistant features) would have reduced foreseeable risks to children and whether the benefits of the challenged design outweigh those risks; no statutory or common-law rule limits the risk-benefit test to malfunctioning products.

Court Disposition

Certified question answered in the affirmative: the risk-benefit test may be used to attempt to prove a design defect in a properly functioning disposable cigarette lighter.

Orders

  • Judgment accordingly