Products Liability in Missouri

Nesselrode v. Executive Beechcraft, Inc., 707 S.W.2d 371 (Mo. 1986)

Ignore paragraph 106 on.

What is the procedural history?

What was the accident?

What was the negligence claim against Beech?

What were the claimed defects in the products claim against Beech?

What is Beech's contention on appeal?

What was the problem with the trim tabs and why did it matter?

When and how did this defect occur?

What does plaintiff say is wrong with the actuators?

How could this be cured?

What did Blevins tell us about reasonable care in a products case?

What is the "core concern" in strict liability?

What must the plaintiff show in a design defect case?

What test does the Restatement use for determining whether a design is defective?

What is considered in the "multifactor test."

How does Mo handle the concept of unreasonable danger in a products case?

Why does Professor Green endorse something like the Mo method?

What was the plaintiff's proof on the question of dangerousness?

What did the mechanics assume that caused them to not test the installation of the new actuators?

What was the industry standard?

What did Beech's own engineering manual say about this?

What was a feasible alternative design?

Why isn't this misuse?

What is Beech's causation argument?

What was the "but for" cause?

Why doesn't this "but for" cause control?

What did the court say about "murphy proof?"

What are the elements of a failure to warn clam? (Important)

What is the determinative issue in a failure to warn case?

What are the plaintiff's alternative ways of bringing a failure to warn action?

Why is products better?

What are the key elements in Mo?

What was plaintiff's evidence on this point?

What did Beech say allowed the parts to be differentiated?

Why did this fail?

What is the difference between instructions and warnings?

What is Beech's causation argument on the warnings?

Why does this fail in this case?

Could it be a good defense on other facts?

What was the problem with the damages?

Why did the defendants care?

What is the MO instruction on damages and what does it say?

Does it allow a net present value instruction?

How did defendants miss their opportunity to attack this chart?

What did the plaintiff about damages say in closing argument?

What does the court say is the real problem with defendants' arguments about net present value?

Why did the court say the defendants lose on this point?