Show v. Ford Motor Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming summary judgment when plaintiff lacked expert testimony regarding whether car had a design defect that rendered it unstable and caused it to roll over
• addressing the need for expert testimony to prove a design defect under the consumer-expectations approach, one of two ways to prove a design defect under Illinois law
• product liability can be established where the “plaintiff” introduces evidence about consumer expectations or product design
• risk utility test requires that inherent risk of danger outweighs any benefits of the challenged design
• \Several intermediate appellate decisions in Illinois say that expert testimony is vital in design-defect cases when aspects of a product's design or operation are outside the scope of lay knowledge.\
• “Several intermediate appellate decisions in Illinois say that expert testimony is vital in design-defect suits when aspects of a product’s design or operation are outside the scope of lay knowledge.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).