A recent ruling by the Michigan Supreme Court arose out of the late Craig White’s purchase of a muffler repair kit. Mr. White bought the kit with the intent to repair his car. Unfortunately, he died of asphyxiation from carbon monoxide as a result of running his automobile in a small enclosed garage.
The Estate of Craig White brought a products liability suit against the manufacturer and distributors of the muffler repair kit. The Estate claims that Mr. White followed the instructions on the repair kit, which included an instruction that required him to start the engine and run it at idle for at least 10 minutes. The Estate’s essential argument is that Defendants were negligent by failing to issue warnings on their product regarding the dangers of carbon monoxide poisoning.
In products liability actions, a defendant’s duty to warn of dangers is governed by MCL 600.2948(2). That provision provides:
A defendant is not liable for failure to warn of a material risk that is or should be obvious to a reasonably prudent product user or a material risk that is or should be a matter of common knowledge to persons in the same or similar position as the person upon whose injury or death the claim is based in a product liability action.
(Emphasis added).
The Supreme Court held that the Estate did not state a valid cause of action. In adopting the dissenting opinion by Judge Kelly of the Michigan Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court reasoned that the risk of carbon monoxide poisoning as a result of running an automobile in an enclosed space is obvious to a reasonably prudent car user. Further, even if it was not obvious, the Court also determined that that Mr. White had experience working with various motors and that operating an automobile in an enclosed space was common knowledge to a person with Mr. White’s knowledge and experience.
Although Mr. White’s death is a tragedy, the law does not require manufacturers to warn consumers of the dangers of obvious risks.
Click here for a copy of the Supreme Court Opinion.
Click here for a copy of the Court of Appeals Opinion.
This article was written by Matthew Ehrlich, Legal Clerk at Demorest Law Firm.
