William McEuin v. Crown Equipment Corporation, Fka Crown Controls Corporation North West Handling Systems, Inc.

Opinion by Judge BETTY B. FLETCHER; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge O’SCANNLAIN.

OPINION

Defendants-Appellants Crown Equipment Corporation and North West Handling Systems, Inc. (collectively “Crown”) appeal the district court’s ruling excluding the introduction of evidence- in a product liability suit initiated by Plaintiff William McEuin (“McEuin”). McEuin was injured while operating a forklift manufactured by Crown. At trial, McEuin claimed that the forklift was defectively designed because the operator cabin was not enclosed with a door and because Crown did not provide an adequate warning concerning the risks associated with the forklift. The jury awarded McEuin compensatory and punitive damages. Crown contends that the district court erred in not permitting the introduction of military forklift design specifications and reports of independent engineers consulted by Crown. The district court had diversity jurisdiction to hear this action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

I.

Crown Equipment Corporation began designing stand-up forklifts in 1969. Crown eventually developed and produced for sale the 30RCTT-190 (“30RC”). The 30RC…

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Because I readily agree with' my colleagues that the military specifications were properly excluded, I join Parts I, II, and III.A.1 of the majority opinion. I believe the district court abused its discretion in refusing to admit the engineering reports, however, and therefore I must respectfully dissent from Part III.A.2.

To recover punitive damages, the plaintiff had to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with wanton disregard for the health, safety, and welfare of others. See O.R.S. §§ 18.537, 30.925. The plaintiff built his case for punitives on evidence tending to show that the defendant had wilfully disregarded its own accident data, ignored applicable safety standards, and lied to purchasers of its equipment, all as a part of an overall strategy to stave off product liability litigation. In response to these charges of bad faith, the defendant offered evidence that it had commissioned two independent engineering reports. These reports recommended against the installation of doors because the addition of doors would cause more injuries, and more serious injuries. The district court excluded the reports,…

328 F.3d 1028 William McEUIN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CROWN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION, fka Crown Controls Corporation; North West Handling Systems, Inc., Defendants-Appellants. No. 00-36043. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted March 7, 2002. Filed April 24, 2003. As Amended on Denial of Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc June 17, 2003 * . COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED John Aisenbrey, Kansas City, MO; Malcolm E. Wheeler, Denver, CO; Donald H. Pyle, Portland, OR; Robert Toland, II, Wayne, PA; and Lee Mickus, Denver, CO, for the defendants-appellants. Mark Zwerling, Kathryn H. Clarke, and J. Randolph Pickett, Portland, OR, for the plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon; Ancer L. Haggerty, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-97-00365-ALH. Before B. FLETCHER, O'SCANNLAIN, and BERZON, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge BETTY B. FLETCHER; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge O'SCANNLAIN. OPINION BETTY B. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge. 1 Defendants-Appellants Crown Equipment Corporation and North West Handling Systems, Inc. (collectively "Crown") appeal the district court's ruling excluding the introduction…