Whirlpool Corp. v. Camacho
Texas Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Johnson
In this products liability case the jury found that a design defect in an electric Whirlpool clothes dryer caused a fatal fire. We must decide whether there is legally sufficient evidence that the dryer’s design was defective because it incorporated a corrugated lint transport tube as part of its air circulation system. Because we conclude that the expert testimony of design defect is legally insufficient to support the verdict, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and render judgment for Whirlpool.
I. Background
A. General
In October 2002, Santos and Margarita Camacho purchased a…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- City of Keller v. WilsonTexas Supreme Court · 2005
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HavnerTexas Supreme Court · 1997
- MacK Trucks, Inc. v. TamezTexas Supreme Court · 2006
- Helena Chemical Co. v. WilkinsTexas Supreme Court · 2001
- Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. CryeTexas Supreme Court · 1995
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by186 opinions
- Jelinek v. CasasTexas Supreme Court · 2010
- Debra C. Gunn, M.D., Obstetrical and Gynecological Associates, P.A., and Obstetrical and Gynecological Associates P.L.L.C. v. Andre McCoy, as Permanent Guardian of Shannon Miles McCoy, an Incapacitated PersonTexas Supreme Court · 2018
- Transcontinental Insurance Co. v. CrumpTexas Supreme Court · 2010
- Gharda USA, Inc. and Gharda Chemicals, Ltd. v. Control Solutions, Inc., United Phosphorus, Inc., and Mark BoydTexas Supreme Court · 2015
- Southwestern Energy Production Co. v. Berry-HelfandTexas Supreme Court · 2016
181 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.