Ge

MEMORANDUM

The district court entered judgment as a matter of law for the defendant, finding no proof that an alleged product defect caused the plaintiffs injury. We vacate the judgment and remand for a new trial.

1. Michael Scantlin was badly burned when an industrial switchboard exploded; he sued General Electric (“GE”), the switchboard manufacturer. Scantlin contended that the explosion occurred when he was working in a safe area and leaned against a metal barrier, which flexed and contacted a live busbar in the “hot” section of the switchboard. GE contended that Scantlin had negligently lowered a metal hook and chain into the “hot” section, contacting the live busbar.

Scantlin offered the expert testimony of Dr. Armstrong, an electrical engineer. The court allowed Dr. Armstrong to opine that the hook and chain did not cause the explosion. However, the court precluded Dr. Armstrong from testifying that contact between the barrier and the busbar caused the explosion because the expert had not performed any testing concerning the flexibility of the barrier. After Scantlin rested his case-in-chief, the district court granted GE judgment as a matter of law, finding insufficient…