Jones v. Ryobi, Ltd.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
37 F.3d 423 (1994)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Jones (plaintiff) was employed to operate a printing press manufactured by Ryobi, Ltd. and distributed by A.B. Dick Corporation (A.B.) (defendants). To ensure proper printing, the operator of the press must frequently adjust the wheels that eject the paper from the press. When it was sold, the press had a safety guard that prevented an operator from reaching into the moving parts of the press to adjust the eject wheels, and an interlock switch which shut off the press if the safety guard was opened. After the press was manufactured and distributed to Jones’s employer, the safety guard and interlock switch were removed. This modification is a common practice in the industry, allowing the press’s eject wheels to be adjusted without stopping the press. Jones’s hand was caught and crushed when she was adjusting the eject wheels on the running press. She brought a strict liability claim for defective design against Ryobi and A.B. At the close of Jones’s case, the district court granted judgment as a matter of law for Ryobi and A.B. based on the open and obvious nature of the press’s dangers. Jones appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fagg, J.)
Dissent (Heaney, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 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.
