I believe Judge Posner focused on the strict-liability in the jar case.
Because the jar was ruled to be defective without question, it’s
defect is the Liability of the manufacturer. The reversal won on the
plaintiff’s failure to provide or prove other causes than manufacturer
defect; therefore, Judge Posner deducted that It's hard to believe
someone would cripple themselves intentionally, and was likely a
result of defect which places liability on the manufacturer. I agree
with this ruling as the universalization rule suggests that companies
would be even slower and less likely to issue recalls if consequences
were slim to none.
