Moore v. Miss. Valley Gas Co., et al.
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-00639-SCT Linked Case(s): 2002-CA-00639-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-06-2003 Opinion Author: Graves, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Identification of product - Unreasonably dangerous product Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., McRae and Smith, P.JJ., Waller, Cobb, Easley and Carlson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-11-2002 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: W. Swan Yerger Disposition: Granted summary judgment to the Appellee. Case Number: 96-738 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | LaToya Denise Moore, a Minor by and through Her Next Friend, Jerome Moore |
SUZANNE GRIGGINS KEYS |
||
| Appellee: | Mississippi Valley Gas Company, a Mississippi Corporation and Rheem Manufacturing Company | MYLES A. PARKER ROBERT DOUGLAS MORGAN CHARLES E. GRIFFIN JAMES L. CARROLL DENNIS BROWN |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Personal injury - Identification of product - Unreasonably dangerous product |
| Summary of the Facts: | LaToya Moore, a minor by and through her next friend, Daphne Sultan, filed an action against Mississippi Valley Gas Company and Rheem Manufacturing Company, alleging that LaToya suffered injury when she fell into a tub of hot water and that the hot water was produced by Rheem’s gas water heater. Mississippi Valley Gas and Rheem filed a combined motion for summary judgment which the court granted. Moore appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Identification of product Moore argues that the hot water heater was a 40-gallon Rheem hot water heater. However, the record shows that there is no witness who can identify the make, model, or manufacturer of the allegedly defective hot water heater. The only evidence of any involvement by Rheem is a sales invoice stating that Cornelius Williams, who previously resided at 511 Hemlock and is now deceases, purchased a 40-gallon hot water heater from Mississippi Valley Gas on February 13, 1981. Two new hot water heaters have been installed since that date, one in 1991 and one in 1996. More than seven years after LaToya’s 1989 burning, Rheem and Mississippi Valley Gas first learned of the incident when they were served in 1996. They did not have an opportunity to identify, view, inspect or test the hot water heater. Because no one is certain whether the 1981 hot water heater was in fact a Rheem product, a jury verdict would be based on speculation and/or conjecture. Issue 2: Unreasonably dangerous product Moore argues that the defective condition of the hot water heater created an unreasonably dangerous product which failed to adequately warn consumers of its hazardous design and feasible design alternative. The plaintiff must show in any products liability action that the defendant’s product was the cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. If the heater was in fact a Rheem brand, the evidence is undisputed that it would have complied with all mandatory and voluntary government and industry standards and would have contained the required scald warning language. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
