Question

Yun Tung Chow tried to unclog a floor drain in the kitchen of the restaurant where he worked. He used a drain cleaner called Lewis Red Devil Lye that contained crystalline sodium hydroxide. The product label said to wear eye protection, to put one tablespoon of lye directly into the drain, and to keep one’s face away from the drain, because there could be dangerous backsplash. Without eye protection, Chow mixed three tablespoons of lye in a can, and poured that mixture down the drain while bending over it. Liquid splashed back into his face, causing injury. He brought a product liability suit based on inadequate warnings and design defect. The trial court granted summary judgment to the manufacturer, and Chow appealed. An expert for Chow stated that the product was defective, because it had a tendency to splash. Is that a convincing argument? Why or why not?

Answer 1

Answer: no, it is not a convincing argument

Step-by-step explanation:

When the product was delivered it was safe and not defective. The instructions were clearly stated that the individual who uses the product must follow in order to ensure their safety. It is not the liability of the company if the person did not read those instructions and this doesn't prove a product to be defective just because the person did not follow proper instructions.

Eventhough it has a tendency to splash but instructions were given to protect the person from those splashes ; the warning was clearly stated.