Baseball umpire Edwin Hickox was injured during a baseball game in Washington, D
Baseball umpire Edwin Hickox was injured during a baseball game in Washington D.C. while wearing a mask made by Wilson Sporting Goods Co. Hickox filed a suit in a court in the District of Columbia against Wilson alleging product-liability claims. A jury issued a verdict in Hickoxs favor. Wilson appealed. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed holding that to determine whether the products design was defective the consumer-expectations test was the appropriate standard in this case. Under that standard considering all the evidence a reasonable juror could conclude that an ordinary consumer would have expected the mask to perform more safely than it did. 1. What is the consumer-expectations test? 2. What factors did the court consider in determining whether the evidence in this case was sufficient to establish reasonable consumer expectations? 3. Can a jury make inferences to arrive at a verdict? 4. How did the appellate courts conclusion in this case affect the parties?
