Liriano v. Hobart Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that ultimate measure of need for warnings is whether they aid or hinder customers in adjusting their behavior to avoid accidents
• noting that ultimate measure of need for warnings is whether they aid or hinder customers in adjusting their behavior to avoid accidents
• noting that requiring warnings against obvious dangers would tend to \trivialize[] and undermine[] the entire purpose of the rule [by] drowning out cautions against latent dangers\
• noting that requiring warnings against obvious dangers would tend to “trivialize! ] and undermine! ] the entire purpose of the rule [by] drowning out cautions against latent dangers”
• “[T]he open and obvious defense generally should not. apply when there are aspects of the hazard which are concealed or not reasonably apparent to the user.”
• “[L]iability can exist under a failure-to-warn theory in cases in which the substantial modification defense . . . might otherwise preclude a design defect claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).