Union Supply Co. v. Pust

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a failure to adequately warn can render a product defective and the \defective condition\ is unreasonably dangerous if the manufacturer fails to give sufficient warnings to make the product safe
• affirming that under the particular facts of that case, a jury could find a design defect from the lack of a safety guard or cleaning device at the “nip point” of the conveyor machine.
• affirming that under the particular facts of that case, a jury could find a design defect from the lack of a safety guard or cleaning device at the “nip point” of the conveyor machine.
• following majority view that manufacturer of component parts is strictly liable for injuries to consumer
• “[E]ven substantial changes which do not affect a pre-existing design defect in parts do not absolve the manufacturer of liability.”
• defect in design of product, rendering it unreasonably dangerous, recognized as basis for strict liability claim under section 402A

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).