Reference no: EM133194811 , Length: 4 pages

Case: Oregon Treats, a manufacturer designed and manufactured a "Cold Drink Blender," which it sold through retail stores in Oregon and throughout the country. The Cold Drink Blender consists of three components: 1. A base that houses the motor, 2. a glass container for liquids with mixing blades inside on the bottom, and 3. a removable cover for the container to prevent liquids from overflowing during mixing. A manufacturer's boolet that came in the box with the Cold Drink Blender states that it is

"perfect for making all of your favorite cold drinks, like mixed fruit drinks and milk shakes, and it even crushes ice to make frozen alcoholic drinks," and cautioned in big bold lettering:

"Do not fill beyond 2 inches of the top."

Walmart, a discount retailer sold one of the Cold Drink Blenders to Alex. One day, Alex was following a recipe for vegetable soup that called for thickening the hot soup by liquefying the vegetables. After deciding to use his Cold Drink Blender for this purpose, Alex filled the glass container to the very top with very hot soup, placed the glass container on the base, put the cover on top, and turned the blender on the highest speed.

The high speed rotation of the mixing blades forced the contents to the top of the container, pushed off the cover, and splashed hot soup all over Alex, who was severely burned by the hot soup.

Alex filed a lawsuit against Oregon Treats, the manufacturer and Walmart, the retailer, pleading claims for both strict products liability and negligence. In his complaint, Alex states that the Cold Drink Blender was not equipped with a cover that locked onto the top of the container in such a way as to prevent it from coming off during operation and that the failure to equip the blender with this safety feature was a cause of his injuries.

Oregon Treats argues that it is not liable because:

(1) Alex's injury was caused by his own "misuse" of the Cold Drink Blender which, as implied by its name, was intended for mixing only cold substances, and certainly not hot soup.
(2) Alex's injury was caused by his own lack of care, as he overfilled the Cold Drink Blender and operated it at high speed.
(3) The design of the Cold Drink Blender was not defective since It complied with design standards set forth in federal regulations promulgated by the federal Consumer Products Safety Commission, which do not require any locking mechanism on blenders.

Walmart argues that it is not liable because:

(1) Walmart played no part in the manufacture of the Cold Drink Blender and therefore should not be held responsible for a defect in its design.

Required: Write a 2-4 page essay answer. How should the court rule on each company's defenses to Alex's lawsuit?