paredown

As scandalous as the "hot coffee" suit (as mentioned) or the one against the small arms maker when someone shot themselves after leaving a bullet in the chamber. A travesty of common law and the "reasonable man" test.

But you can imagine how the questioning went:
Q: "Did you speak with SawStop?"
A: "Yes"
Q: "Did you add their technology to your saws?"
A: "No"
Q: "Why not?"
A: "Talks broke down"
Q: "Over what?"
A: "Price."

Statement: "So your company was too cheap to protect the fingers of millions of innocent American wood workers!"

Framed as corporate greed versus some poor schmo, of course the jury took the baited hook. Never mind as everyone notes, the Ryobi is an entry level saw. The fact that they knew of the technology and rejected it because it was too expensive makes them guilty, even though had they added it the schmo would not have been able to (or wanted to buy) the more expensive saw.

Tools are dangerous--how could this be news? And there is not enough safety equipment in the world to compensate for stupidity, carelessness, neglect or over familiarity that breeds contempt (and ends in accidents)