Elmer Freund and Carol Freund, His Wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. Cellofilm Properties, Inc., a Body Corporate; “u”…

Summary

The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the lower court's judgment and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial judge erred by charging the jury solely on negligence rather than on strict liability for an inadequate warning design defect and by failing to give a concurrent negligence instruction. The Court required a strict liability charge that imputes the manufacturer's knowledge of danger and a proper concurrent negligence instruction on remand.