BillN100

This is not the end of this story. It is only the beginning. The award in this case, on appeal, will almost certainly be substantially reduced, if not reversed. Car manufacturers could design an almost completely safe car(at enormous cost), but they are not required to. The normal standard is whether it was reasonably foreseeable that this injury would have occurred. It doesn't seem reasonable to assume that the person using the device would remove all the safety features and then use it in a way directly contrary to the manual. That's why we have appeals, to help set the standards of conduct in our society. Of course, appellate judges are people too and they don't always get it right. Sometimes it takes legislation to find the balance, and legislators are not always known for getting it right either. However, this is the system we have and compared to most other systems it works fairly well, the comment about Canada notwithstanding - just compare their postal service to ours. Before we go off the deep end on this, why don't we wait to see how the story ends?