Forrest Walker, Petitioner v. Ford Motor Company, Respondent

Summary

The court held that a trial court erred by permitting the jury to use either the consumer-expectation test or the risk-benefit test to evaluate the alleged design defect in a car seat. Because the design's dangerousness depended primarily on technical and scientific evidence, the risk-benefit test was required. The court also held that the jury's separate negligence verdict did not make the instructional error harmless because the jury could have used the improper consumer-expectation standard to find negligence.