Products Liability Law Reporter

A federal district court held that a products liability claim against Tricam Industries, Inc., Home Depot USA, Inc., and Home Depot Supply, Inc., was not subject to summary judgment based on a ladder owner’s deposition testimony, which contradicted factual assertions in his complaint.

Here, Michael Martin stood on a Tricam ladder while removing a tree limb. The ladder collapsed, causing Martin to fall to the ground. He filed suit against Tricam and Home Depot, alleging the ladder was negligently designed and manufactured. The complaint asserted that while Martin was standing on the ladder, a limb fell from the tree, bounced off the ground, and made contact with the ladder, which fell out from underneath him. Additionally, the plaintiff claimed that the ladder’s rivets failed to hold it in place. At deposition, the plaintiff contradicted the complaint, stating that he did not witness the tree branch falling and that he never claimed that it struck the ladder.

The defense moved for summary judgment on the basis that the plaintiff’s deposition testimony undermined his liability theories and causation.

Denying the motion, the district court found that the plaintiff’s admission at deposition does not preclude liability. A jury may find that the ladder was defective even absent proof that it was struck by the tree limb, the court said. The plaintiff has supplied the testimony of two witnesses who assert that the ladder collapsed underneath the plaintiff suddenly and without warning, the court found, adding that the plaintiff’s expert also has concluded that the ladder’s rivet sheared during normal use, causing the ladder to become unstable and collapse. Although the pleadings are slightly different from the evidence the plaintiff presents, the court noted, he has not changed his central theory of liability and causation or prevented the defense from knowing the nature of the claims against them. Consequently, the court held that the case may proceed to trial.

Citation: Martin v. Tricam Indus., Inc., 2019 WL 2166716 (D. Mass. May 17, 2019).

Plaintiff counsel: John T. Martin, Boston; and AAJ member James W. Duffy, Worcester, Mass.