Green v. Smith & Nephew AHP, Inc.

629 N.W.2d 727 (2001)

From our private database of 47,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Green v. Smith & Nephew AHP, Inc.

Wisconsin Supreme Court
629 N.W.2d 727 (2001)

Emily Laird headshot
  • Written by Emily Laird, JD

Facts

Smith & Nephew AHP, Inc. (S&N) (defendant) manufactured latex medical gloves. Linda Green (plaintiff) wore S&N’s gloves and suffered a severe allergic reaction. Green claimed S&N’s gloves were defective because the gloves’ design allowed the latex proteins in the gloves to cause an allergic reaction. In the circuit court, a jury found S&N liable for Green’s injuries. S&N appealed to the court of appeals, which affirmed the circuit court’s judgment. S&N appealed to the state supreme court, arguing that an ordinary consumer could not have contemplated the latex design flaw, that Green must show S&N knew of the risk its gloves posed, and that Green must show that S&N could have used an alternative design to make its gloves safer.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Wilcox, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 966,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 966,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,500 briefs, keyed to 1,007 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.
  • AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 966,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,500 briefs - keyed to 1,007 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Products Liability

Torts

Key Terms

  • Strict LiabilityImposition of liability upon a defendant regardless of the defendant’s conduct or fault. Under strict liability in the tort context, an actor is liable regardless of whether the actor was negligent or otherwise culpable. Strict liability in the tort context is imposed only in limited circumstances; it may be applied in cases involving abnormally dangerous activities, injuries caused by animals, and products liability. In criminal law, strict liability imposes criminal liability with no proof of fault. Strict liability may extend to all elements of a crime or only to some elements. In many jurisdictions, strict liability is also known as absolute liability.
  • NegligenceConduct that falls below the expected standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would have exercised under like circumstances.
  • Design DefectA design of a product that is so inherently dangerous that the product’s creator and promoters should bear liability for injuries resulting from the product’s use. A design is defective if the product fails to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when used in an intended or reasonably foreseeable manner, or if, in light of all relevant factors, the benefits of the challenged design do not outweigh the risk of danger inherent in the design.

Related Videos

Understand your casebook readings in seconds

Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.

Get instant access to over 47,500+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,007 law school casebooks.

Case book preview
Start your free 7-day trial