Yakovich

Yakovich v. Smart & Final Inc.

Good Law
72 F. App'x 524
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 20, 2003No. 02-16212California649 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Yakovich and his mother, Melinda Krieg, 1 argue that the district court erred in granting summary judgment and in concluding that Yakovieh’s injuries were not proximately caused by Smart & Final’s failure to warn. Yakovich contends that there are material disputes of fact regarding whether a different warning label would have prevented his injuries. He claims that his supervisor, Andrew Sawyer, would have read the proposed warning label, communicated the potential danger to Yakovich, and changed the restaurant’s policies. The district court held that since Yakovich was not using the product at the time of his injuries, a more explicit warning would not have prevented Yakovich’s injuries. We affirm on this basis.

Under Arizona law, in order to establish a prima facie case of strict products liability, a plaintiff must show: (1) the product is defective and unreasonably dangerous; (2) the defect existed at the time the product left the defendant’s control; and (3) the defective condition is the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. Dole Food Co., Inc. v. North Carolina Foam Indus., Inc., 188 Ariz. 298 , 935 P.2d 876, 879 (Ariz.Ct.App.1997) (citing Piper v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.