Roberts v. May

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that under Colorado law where the manufacturer claimed misuse, the plaintiff's voluntary choice of accepting the risk associated with not wearing a safety belt was for the jury to determine
• holding that state-of-the-art evidence is admissible in defective design cases
• holding that state-of-the-art evidence is admissible in defective design cases
• holding the principle that subsequent remedial measures are not admissible applies only in negligence cases because “where an action is based on an alleged design defect, one important question is the existence of feasible alternatives”
• fact that automobile was designed in compliance with all federal safety standards not a defense
• compliance with dashboard rigidity standard did not necessarily satisfy state tort duty of care

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).