McCormack v. Hankscraft Co.

278 Minn. 322, 154 N.W.2d 488 (1967)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

McCormack v. Hankscraft Co.

Minnesota Supreme Court
278 Minn. 322, 154 N.W.2d 488 (1967)

Facts

In 1960, the mother of three-year-old Andrea McCormack (plaintiff) purchased an electric Hankscraft steam vaporizer manufactured by Hankscraft Company, Inc. (Hankscraft) (defendant), to be used as a humidifier. To operate the vaporizer, a user would fill a glass jar with nearly one gallon of water, place the jar in an aluminum pan, and place a plastic cap with a heating element on the jar. The cap did not screw onto the jar, so the water would spill out of the jar if the vaporizer was tipped over. The instruction booklet that accompanied the vaporizer represented that the unit was “safe” and “practically foolproof.” The booklet also showed a picture of the vaporizer sending steam over a baby's crib. However, the booklet failed to disclose that the water temperature in the unit reached scalding levels. The booklet also failed to provide any warning regarding the probable dangers from upset of the unit. Mrs. McCormack read the booklet “cover to cover.” Mrs. McCormack placed the vaporizer on a kitchen stool about four feet from Andrea’s bed and turned the vaporizer on for overnight use. During the night, Andrea got out of bed to use the restroom and knocked over the unit, causing 211-degree water to be spilled on her. Andrea suffered severe and permanent burns on more than 30 percent of her body, including third-degree burns on her chest, shoulders, and back. Andrea's father (plaintiff) filed suit on Andrea's behalf against Hankscraft for negligence in its failure to warn of the inherent dangers of the vaporizer and in its adoption of an unsafe design. At trial, a jury found for the McCormacks and awarded $150,000 in damages. However, the trial court granted Hankscraft’s motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and granted a conditional new trial. The McCormacks appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rogosheske, 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 810,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—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 810,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 810,000 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
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 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