United States: New Strategies For Winning Dismissal Of A Failure To Warn Claim: Wu Jiang V. Ridge Tool Company

Given hindsight borne of any accident, it is seductive to argue, and for a jury to want to believe, that a few additional simple words of warning would have prevented a catastrophic consequence. In New York, failure to warn claims are sometimes favored by plaintiffs bringing product liability actions because they do not require the thorny analysis (or perhaps even expert analysis) of the risk and utility of the product at issue. "If only they had said this" is a powerful pitch, and, in a severe injury case, it provides a challenging argument for defense counsel to address before a jury.

A recent decision granting summary judgment for the defendant presents a compelling model for successfully defeating a failure to warn claim. Wu Jiang v. Ridge Tool Company, et. al, decided by the Honorable Rosalynn R. Mauskopf of the Eastern District of New York on March 27, 2018, is significant because it resolves the following issues, in favor of the defense, as a matter of law:

  1. Adequacy of the warning; and
  2. Conspicuity and intensity of the warning.

Also significant was the finding, as a matter of law, that plaintiff was a knowledgeable user and that he did not require a warning to conform his conduct to safe work practice.

The case involved a 2014 accident sustained by plaintiff, Jiang, while using a Ridgid Wet/Dry Vacuum after sanding a floor. There was no dispute in the case that the floor residue left after sanding was flammable and that Jiang knew it was flammable. Jiang noticed smoke emanating from the Vacuum, so he unplugged it and picked it up by the handles to carry it to the sink in the next room. When he lifted it, the bottom of the Vacuum detached and flames erupted from it, badly burning Jiang's arm.

Jiang, an immigrant, the decision points out, had been in the country for many years, and was somewhat conversant in the English language. The product has multiple warnings concerning the use of the vacuum to pick up flammable materials. "The warning on the Vacuum reads: 'WARNING . . . Do not pick up hot ashes, coals, toxic, flammable or other hazardous materials.' ... Additionally, the user's manual reads: 'To reduce the risk of fire or explosion, do not use near combustible liquids, gases or dusts.' ... Both warnings are accompanied by a graphic of a triangle with an exclamation point." Citations omitted. Note that the decision has value to the defense bar if for no other reason that it treats a warning contained in a manual in a similar manner to that mounted on the product itself, though here both sets of warnings were obviously quite similar.

The Court determined that the warning need not provide a full listing of materials that should not be vacuumed, and found the conspicuity and importance of the warnings to be sufficient as a matter of law. "Jiang contends that, despite including a warning not to use the Vacuum to pick up flammable dusts, the defendants should be held liable because they did not specifically mention polyurethane sanding dust. This argument fails to create a triable issue of fact as to adequacy." As the Court observed:

"The defendants, having warned about the general hazard, were not required to provide a list of every single flammable substance that the Vacuum could be foreseeably used near, nor would it have been possible to do so. Attempting to create such a detailed warning could render the warning unclear, and therefore inadequate. In addition, '[r]equiring too many warnings trivializes and undermines the entire purpose of the rule, drowning out cautions against latent dangers of which a user might not otherwise be aware,' and 'would neutralize the effectiveness of warnings.'" Citations omitted.

This is a very direct opinion, confirming that not every foolish practice needs to be warned against. There is a concept in Communications known as "information clutter." If you provide too many warnings, no one reads them. Moreover, with "information clutter," warnings that are important seem less important because they are surrounded by information to be readily dismissed as obvious. As the New York Court of Appeals held some 20 years ago in Liriano v. Hobart Corporation:

"This is particularly important because requiring a manufacturer to warn against obvious dangers could greatly increase the number of warnings accompanying certain products. If a manufacturer must warn against even obvious dangers, '[t]he list of foolish practices warned against would be so long, it would fill a volume' (Kerr v. Koemm, 557 F Supp 283, 288 [SD NY 1983]). Requiring too many warnings trivializes and undermines the entire purpose of the rule, drowning out cautions against latent dangers of which a user might not otherwise be aware. Such a requirement would neutralize the effectiveness of warnings as an inexpensive way to allow consumers to adjust their behavior based on knowledge of a product's inherent dangers."

Liriano involved a 17 year old kitchen worker, literate in only Spanish (differentiating him immediately from Jiang), who lost his hand in a materially altered meat grinder (permanent guard removed with a blow torch). The manufacturer, the year after the subject grinder left its control and custody, began issuing a warning providing that the product was not to be used without the guard as provided by the manufacturer. In a very notorious decision for its time, the Court held that the manufacturer could be held responsible for the failure to provide that warning, obviousness notwithstanding, to apprise the plaintiff of the "option" of using a product with a guard. In Liriano, despite the Court's favorable comments on information clutter, the failure to warn issues were decided by a jury in favor of the plaintiff, and a plaintiff's verdict was affirmed.

Looked at in a broader perspective, the Wu Jiang decision is yet another example of increasing judicial antipathy to failure to warn claims. In Liriano itself, the Second Circuit predicted that New York law would apply a "heeding presumption" in warning cases, shifting the burden of proof to the defense. The Court of Appeals has recently held, explicitly, that it is plaintiff's burden to prove that, had an appropriate warning been issued, plaintiff would have read and heeded that warning. Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 2016 N.Y. LEXIS 1762 at *51 (Court of Appeals, June 28, 2016). Wu Jiang, in a sense, goes a step further, rejecting the notion that feigned questions as to the "adequacy" of a warning must go to a jury. If the subject to be warned against is touched on meaningfully, every last specific is not required. If appropriate signal language and presentation is provided, conspicuity can be resolved as a matter of law. And, importantly, a Court may consider the warnings supplied in the manual on a motion for summary judgment as well.

In many warning cases post-Liriano, plaintiffs who tried to rely on a Liriano type warning argument came up very short, typically because plaintiff was deemed an experienced or knowledgeable user. See, e.g., Ramirez v. Komori Am. Corp., 1999 WL 187072 (S.D.N.Y. April 6, 1999); Conn v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 262 A.D.2d 954, 692 N.Y.S.2d 543 (4th Dep't 1999). As a practice tip, and as occurred in Wu Jiang, the best defense to a failure to warn claim remains demonstrating that plaintiff already knew everything a warning should have told him. Luis Liriano was new to his job, Mr. Jiang was not. Deposition questioning is critical. If the plaintiff was aware of the hazard of using a machine and knew he or she could be injured, there is no warning claim. As the Court held in Liriano, if plaintiff "participated in removal of the safety device whose purpose is obvious," a warning would be "superfluous" given that "actual knowledge of the specific hazard." The plaintiff would therefore not be able to prove causation; that is, that the plaintiff's conduct would have changed, the machine would not have been misused, and the accident would not have occurred had more purportedly "adequate" warnings been provided.

A plaintiff must be questioned about his or her experience with this machine, and all machines. Before deposing the plaintiff, attorneys should coordinate with their client and expert to learn everything about the right way to do the job. Make plaintiff into an expert in the usage of the product, even a teacher (that comes across to a Court on summary judgment and at trial). How many years have you used this machine? How many hours a day? Ever witness anyone get injured while using it? What were they doing wrong? Did you train others in the use of the product? If you saw someone else doing what you did, would you give them a safety infraction (remarkably, you might get a yes to this question)?

Questions about reading of the manual are no risk propositions for a defendant. If they read the manual, but did not heed the manual, the manual warnings can almost certainly be considered fair game on summary judgment. If they did not read the manual, that alone could be considered culpable conduct. It is important, however, to consider that many Judges and Jurors do not read manuals. How many of us read the entire manual for our automobiles, cover to cover, rather than consult it on an "as needed" basis (like when we need to change the clocks for daylight savings time).

Wu Jiang is a good roadmap for preparation and ultimate dismissal of a failure to warn claim. If plaintiff can be boxed into arguing for consequence related or cumulative warnings, and a good record is developed on "knowledgeable user," dismissal should follow. To further protect against liability, businesses should continue to emphasize in the marketing, sale and warnings supplied with the product the importance of safe product usage.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Morrison & Foerster LLP
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Morrison & Foerster LLP
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions