Watkins v. Hartsock

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the language of the seat belt statute excluded evidence that a child restraint system was allegedly misused in a forward facing position
• holding that evidence of misuse of a child safety restraint system, like evidence of nonuse, is inadmissible for purposes of determining comparative negligence or mitigation of damages and explaining that the statutory rule as well as the common law would prohibit this evidence
• misuse of child safety belt was not admissible to show that parent was comparatively negligent
• automobile manufacturer may introduce evidence of non- or misuse of its product when defending design of vehicle against crashworthiness theory
• to state plausible claim of negligence per se under Tennessee law, complaint must identify specific regulation and allege facts plausibly suggesting violation of that specific statute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).