McConnell v. Cosco, Inc.
United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
238 F. Supp. 2D 970 (2003)

- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Penn Traffic Company (defendant) pre-assembled and sold Lori McClung a children’s highchair manufactured by Cosco, Inc. (defendant). The chair came equipped with a safety strap. The chair’s back and the underside of the chair tray both warned consumers to strap children into the chair and never leave seated children unattended. These warnings were repeated in the chair’s carton labels and instruction manual, which Penn Traffic did not include with the pre-assembled chair. The parents of 11-month-old Matthew McConnell (plaintiffs) left Matthew in McClung’s care. McClung placed Matthew in the chair, unstrapped, and left the room. When McClung returned, she found Matthew trapped between the chair’s seat and tray and nearly strangled. The accident left Matthew with permanent brain damage and partial paralysis. The McConnells filed a federal-court diversity suit against Cosco and Penn Traffic, seeking compensatory and punitive damages under Ohio’s strict-liability statute and in negligence for Matthew’s injuries, as well as for back injuries that Mrs. McConnell incurred in caring for her paralyzed son. The suit alleged that the chair was defective and accompanied by inadequate hazard warnings. Evidence proved that the chair was well made. Cosco and Penn Traffic moved for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kemp, 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.