Dewitt v. Eveready Battery Co.
North Carolina Supreme Court
355 N.C. 672, 565 S.E.2d 140 (2002)
- Written by Noah Lewis, JD
Facts
Franklin Roland DeWitt (plaintiff) purchased eight Energizer size-D batteries manufactured by Eveready Battery Company, Inc. (Eveready) (defendant). DeWitt placed the batteries in a new battery-powered lantern and assumed he correctly aligned the batteries. Displeased with the brightness, DeWitt decided to return the lantern the next day. To remove the batteries, DeWitt held the lantern between his ankles for 3 to 4 minutes. DeWitt noticed a slimy feeling on one of the batteries and on the bottom of the lantern. DeWitt noticed moisture on his sock, felt a tingling on his ankle, and noticed his ankle was red but assumed it was a bug bite. DeWitt drove to the store and returned the lantern. While returning home, DeWitt felt a burning on his ankle. The heel of Dewitt’s right foot was black. DeWitt filed a lawsuit alleging products-liability claims based on negligence and breach of warranty, specifically manufacturing a defective product and manufacturing a product with an inadequate warning. At trial, experts testified that a venting system in the batteries could have caused the leakage of chemicals from the batteries, and DeWitt’s injuries were consistent with that. Experts opined that the leakage could have been caused by recharging the battery, putting the batteries in backwards, mixing old and new batteries, or manufacturing defects, such as gross contamination in the battery. The trial court entered summary judgment for Eveready on the claim for breach of implied warranty of merchantability by manufacturing defective batteries, and the appellate court reversed. Eveready appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Edmunds, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.