This case involves a manufacturer's liability for using a "yielding seat" design rather than a rigid seat design in a car's front seat. A fatal car accident led to a suit alleging defective design, and the lower court allowed the jury to use a simple "consumer expectations" test in determining whether the design was proper.
The NAM joined with the Illinois Manufacturers Association in an amicus brief arguing that the correct standard in design defects cases for complex products is the modern "risk utility" test found in the Third Restatement of Torts: Products Liability. That test looks to the risks and benefits of the product's allegedly defective design and the feasibility of safer alternative designs. The lower courts in this case, however, looked solely to whether the product (a common type of automobile seat) was unreasonably dangerous according to consumer expectations; this is a test found in the older Second Restatement that is still widely applied to manufacturing defects, but not to design defects.
Our brief noted that rigid seat designs create greater risks in some accidents, and that yielding seats are clearly superior and far safer in most rear end collisions. We argued that a jury should be directed to consider whether the benefits of the car's design outweigh the risk of damages, as well as the feasibility of possible alternative designs and their possible effects on the overall safety of the product. The risk-utility test is fair and reasonable in complex products design litigation, and while the consumer expectations test is arbitrary and completely unsuited for this type of case. Its use puts manufacturers in the untenable position of not being able to minimize harmful accidents without incurring tort liability in some cases.
On 10/17/08, the Illinois Supreme Court disagreed, holding that the risk-utility test is not the exclusive test under Illinois law to determine whether a product is designed in an unreasonably dangerous way. Such policies, it ruled, should be changed by the legislature, not the courts.