The theory of liability that Justice Posner used in finding the defendant liable is the
doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. The judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff as a reasonable
amount of pressure could not have caused the jar to break. If the probability of damage
occurring after the plaintiff bought the product is low, then the likelihood that the jar was
sold defective is high.
I agree with the decision as the seller is responsible and accountable for product defects.
All evidence points to it being more likely than not that damage occurred either due to a
defect or improper handling before the product's sale. One product liability case that came
to mind while writing my post involved McDonald's and the plaintiff being burned by hot
coffee she purchased from the establishment. The claim was that Mcdonald's coffee was
too hot. The plaintiff initially won, but the parties settled for an undisclosed amount.
References
-Matt Fleischer-Black,letters to theeditor@corp.law.com, Special to the the american lawyer.
(May 2, 2008 Friday (Date Authored)). One Lump Or Two?; The infamous coffee-burn case is
about to get a tenth-anniversary rerun. The first verdict inspired both crude caricature and
qu.The American Lawyer.https://advance-lexis-com.ezproxy.snhu.edu/api/document?
collection=legalnews&id=urn:contentItem:52PV-3YD1-DYF0-S062-00000-
00&context=1516831.
