Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
Sellers who place defective and unreasonably dangerous products on the market are at fault when a user is injured by that activity and should bear responsibility. A corporate successor is not a seller and bears no blame in bringing the product and the user together.
The consumer was injured by a defective treadmill, which was manufacturer by the seller corporation. The seller corporation had sold its assets to the buyer corporation before the consumer's injuries occurred. The consumer then brought an action against the seller corporation (which was dissolved), the product seller, and the buyer corporation. When the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the buyer corporation, the consumer and the product seller sought review. The appellate court reversed and the buyer corporation filed a petition for writ of certiorari.
Under the circumstances, could the buyer corporation be held liable for the injuries sustained by the consumer?
The court granted the writ and reversed the appellate court's decision. The court declined to adopt the rule of continuity of enterprise because there was no causal relationship between the consumer and the buyer corporation. The court found that the buyer corporation was not a seller and bore no blame in bringing the product and the user together. The court decided to adhere to the general rule of nonliability of successor corporations, with its four traditional exceptions, in product liability cases.