Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

 Metzgar v. Playskool Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
30 F.3d 459 (1994)


Facts

In 1990, the 15-month-old son of Ronald Metzgar (plaintiff) choked to death on a building block manufactured by Playskool Inc. (Playskool) (defendant). There was not a choking-hazard warning on the building-block box, but the box did state that the building blocks were only for children between one-and-a-half years and five years of age. The block’s size and shape met federal consumer product safety standards. Metzgar sued Playskool, alleging negligent design of the blocks. Playskool argued that in the previous 20 years, the block had not prompted any complaints for choking injuries. Metzgar’s expert witness testified that in 1988, 11 children had died as a result of choking on small toys or toy parts. The district court conducted a risk-utility analysis and found that the risk of choking on one of the blocks was so small that the risk was not an unreasonable one and was thus permitted under the law. Specifically, the district court found that there was not a realistic threshold of risk of choking on the block. The district court granted Playskool’s motion for summary judgment. Metzgar appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Mansmann, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Scirica, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 177,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.