Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Deere & Co.
25 A.3d 571
| Conn. | 2011Background
- Fire occurred July 13, 2003 at Cheshire home; origin traced to west bay of garage where tractor was stored
- Homeowners purchased a John Deere LX 178 tractor in April 1998 and used it with prior rough running since spring 2003 after a tune-up
- Investigators Boris (origin) and Bush (vehicle fires) concluded the fire originated in the tractor area; Bush could not rule out an electrical failure but found no definite defect in remaining components
- Plaintiff, via subrogation, sued Deere claiming the tractor’s electrical system left the factory defective and caused the fire; Deere moved to exclude malfunction theory and expert testimony and raised spoliation defenses
- Trial court denied motions; jury returned for plaintiff; appellate reversal held that evidence did not satisfy malfunction theory; directed verdict for Deere on remand
- The judgment is reversed and remanded with instructions to grant Deere’s directed verdict
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether malfunction theory supports liability here | Plaintiff argues malfunction theory permits circumstantial proof of a defect | Defendant contends evidence does not establish defect existed when left manufacturer | Malfunction theory allowed but evidence insufficient; directed verdict for defendant warranted |
| Whether plaintiff’s evidence eliminated alternate causes | Plaintiff claims evidence rules out other causes and links to defect | Defendant asserts possible maintenance/other causes remain | Insufficient linkage to defect attributable to manufacturer; trial court should have directed verdict for defendant |
| Whether expert and spoliation evidence were properly admitted/excluded | Boris/Bush testimony admissible under malfunction theory; spoliation not fatal | Porter exclusions and spoliation concerns should have barred or limited testimony | Court did not reach Porter/spoliation issues due to lack of sufficient malfunction theory evidence |
| Standard for directed verdict in malfunction-theory cases | Evidence supports inference of defect under malfunction theory | Probative evidence insufficient to prove defect existed at sale/left control | Directed verdict in defendant’s favor appropriate; plaintiff failed to prove defect at time of sale |
| Whether age/life expectancy of product undermines inference | Age of tractor does not bar malfunction inference given lingering evidence | Older product increases risk of alternate causes | Age weakened inference; not alone fatal, but combined with other factors insufficient |
Key Cases Cited
- Potter v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co., 241 Conn. 199 (1997) (standard for strict liability elements and defect existence in inference framework)
- Giglio v. Connecticut Light & Power Co., 180 Conn. 230 (1980) (recognizes malfunction theory applicability in absence of direct defect evidence)
- Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 35 Conn.Supp. 687 (1979) (malfunction theory evidence permissible when other causes absent; self-ignition example)
- Living & Learning Centre, Inc. v. Griese Custom Signs, Inc., 3 Conn.App. 661 (1985) (malfunction theory applied to infer defect from malfunction when direct evidence unavailable)
- Fallon v. Matworks, 50 Conn.Supp. 207 (2007) (malfunction theory extended to allow inference of defect when direct evidence missing)