Cameron v. Otto Bock Orthopedic Industry, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
43 F.3d 14 (1994)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
William Cameron (plaintiff) had one of his legs amputated. Cameron received a prosthetic leg that consisted of parts manufactured by Otto Bock Orthopedic Industry, Inc. (Otto Bock) (defendant). Cameron fell and sustained injuries when one of the parts of the prosthetic leg broke. Cameron sued Otto Bock for products liability, claiming that the leg had a design defect. Otto Bock argued that the leg was designed properly but that Cameron’s prosthetist had screwed a clamp in the prosthetic leg too tightly, causing the break. After the incident, Otto Bock wrote letters to its prosthetist customers instructing the proper torque at which the clamps should be screwed into the company’s prosthetic legs. At trial, Cameron sought to introduce these letters as evidence of Otto Bock’s liability. The district court excluded the letters under Federal Rule of Evidence 407 (Rule 407). The jury found in Otto Bock’s favor. Cameron appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Boudin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
