Geshke v. Crocs, Inc.
889 F. Supp. 2d 253
D. Mass.2012Background
- Eight-year-old N.K. injured her toe when her shoe caught in an MBTA escalator side skirt at Aquarium Station during a family ride in July 2010.
- Plaintiff Nancy Geshke sues Crocs, Inc. on counts including defective design and failure to warn, on her and N.K.’s behalf.
- Crocs moves for summary judgment, arguing no admissible expert support for design defect and causation for failure to warn.
- Meti/NITE report from Japan and Crocs’ internal redesign efforts are referenced as potential evidence of safer design; expert Leyden’s testimony is challenged as insufficient.
- Court addresses choice of law, expert admissibility, and the sufficiency of warnings under Massachusetts law, culminating in grant of summary judgment for Crocs.
- Geshke asserts Crocs’ own actions and METI findings show a safer design; the court finds such evidence inadmissible or insufficient to raise triable issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether design defect claim survives without admissible expert testimony | Geshke relies on METI/NITE findings and Crocs’ redesign. | Leyden necessary; no admissible expert on defective design. | No; design claim fails without admissible expert testimony. |
| Whether failure-to-warn claim is viable given pre-accident warnings | Adequate warning would have altered plaintiff’s conduct. | Existing warnings were conspicuous and adequate; earlier Crocs warning would not have changed outcome. | Failure-to-warn claim fails; no causation shown. |
| Which state's law governs the tort claims | California law should apply as purchase and injury relate to California. | Massachusetts law applies under Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws §145. | Massachusetts law applies. |
| Whether implied warranties claim sustains if design and warning claims fail | Merchantability/warranty claims premised on defect or failure to warn. | If negligence/warning claims fail, warranty claims fail as well. | Implied warranty claim fails; counts dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Back v. Wickes Corp., 375 Mass. 633 (Mass. 1978) (duty to design reasonably; risk is not eliminated by perfection)
- Ulwick v. DeChristopher, 411 Mass. 401 (Mass. 1991) (elements of product design negligence; feasibility of safer design considered)
- Barker v. Lull Eng’g Co., 573 P.2d 443 (Cal. 1978) (considerations for safer alternative designs; Feasibility and cost balance)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (U.S. 1993) (gatekeeping reliability standard for scientific evidence)
- Massachusetts choice-of-law functional approach (Restatement §145), (Mass. case law cited within opinion) (Mass. 1980s) (fictional citation in memorandum; relied on Restatement approach to conflict of laws)