Whitaker v. T.J. Snow Co.

Walker Manufacturing Company (Walker) purchased a seam welder from RWC, Inc. in 1979. In 1988, Walker hired T.J. Snow Company (Snow) (defendant) to update the welder’s electrical circuits. Walker specified all of the component parts to be used and stated in the purchase order that the work involved a “retrofit” and “modification.” Snow responded with a shop order agreeing to use the parts specified by Walker and stating that “the basic welder is not to be rebuilt.” Snow then completed the work and returned the welder to Walker. Snow did not manufacture the parts it installed or change the welder’s function or configuration. About five years later, Walker trained a new employee, Naomi Whitaker (plaintiff), on how to use the welder. Specifically, Walker instructed that if molten metal splattered onto the welder’s wheels, Whitaker had to reach inside the welder and chisel off the metal. Whitaker did as instructed, but the welder caught Whitaker’s hand at a pinch point and broke her fingers. Whitaker filed a strict products-liability claim against Snow. Whitaker argued that Snow had become the manufacturer of the welder because of the extensive work that Snow performed and that the welder was in an unreasonably dangerous and defective condition because it lacked safety guards and warning labels at the pinch points. The district court found that Snow was not subject to strict liability because its work for Walker mostly provided a service rather than selling or manufacturing a product. Accordingly, the district court granted summary judgment for Snow. Whitaker appealed.