Comments to the Reporters and Selected Members of the Consultative Group, Restatement of Torts (Third): Products Liability
Tennessee Law Review
Howard C. Klemme, Comments to the Reporters and Selected Members of the Consultative Group, Restatement of Torts (Third): Products Liability, 61 Tenn. L. Rev. 1173 (1994), available at https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/faculty-articles/771.
Copyright protected. Use of materials from this collection beyond the exceptions provided for in the Fair Use and Educational Use clauses of the U.S. Copyright Law may violate federal law. Permission to publish or reproduce is required.
Commercial Law Commons, Legal Remedies Commons, Torts Commons
"This article was published originally at 61 Tenn. L. Rev. 1173 (1994) and appears here by permission of the Tennessee Law Review Association, Inc."
"These comments were written by Howard C. Klemme, Professor of Law Emeritus at the University of Colorado at Boulder. They were originally submitted to the Reporters and selected members of the Consultative Group, of which Professor Klemme is a member, shortly before the annual meeting of the American Law Institute in mid-May, 1994. His comments were directed primarily toward subsections 2(b) and 2(c) of Tentative Draft No. 1 (April 12, 1994) of the Restatement. Subsection 2(b) defines a design defect in terms of "foreseeable risks of harm" that "could have been reduced by the adoption of a reasonable alternative design," the omission of which "renders the product not reasonably safe." Subsection 2(c) defines a defect of inadequate instructions or warnings in terms of "foreseeable risks of harm" that "could have been reduced by the provision of reasonable instructions or warnings," the omission of which "renders the product not reasonably safe."
In his cover letter Professor Klemme stated that his "analyses of the case authorities offered [by the Reporters] in support of Subsections 2(b) and 2(c), as now proposed, raise serious doubts about whether those subsections are in fact accurate restatements of the existing law, or are, instead, an effort to revise that law to suit the political ends of others." Professor Klemme consented to publication of these comments by the Tennessee Law Review. However, to have them conform to a style more suitable to their present context, some editorial changes have been made in the text and several references have been added. Three corrections have also been made, as described infra in notes 17 and 80."