White v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc.

Summary

The court held that the plaintiff failed to preserve a malfunction-theory products-liability claim because his amended complaint alleged only a specific defect and did not plead facts supporting an unspecified defect or the malfunction theory's elements. The plaintiff could not introduce that alternative theory for the first time in opposition to summary judgment, at oral argument, or in a motion for reargument. The court therefore affirmed the Appellate Court without reaching whether the plaintiff had established a prima facie malfunction-theory claim.