Legal Opinion

Whirlpool Corp. v. Camacho

Texas Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 2009No. 08-0175PublishedCited by 186 opinions

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

  1. City of Keller v. WilsonTexas Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HavnerTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  3. MacK Trucks, Inc. v. TamezTexas Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Helena Chemical Co. v. WilkinsTexas Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. CryeTexas Supreme Court · 1995

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by186 opinions

  1. Jelinek v. CasasTexas Supreme Court · 2010
  2. 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
  3. Transcontinental Insurance Co. v. CrumpTexas Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Gharda USA, Inc. and Gharda Chemicals, Ltd. v. Control Solutions, Inc., United Phosphorus, Inc., and Mark BoydTexas Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Southwestern Energy Production Co. v. Berry-HelfandTexas Supreme Court · 2016

181 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API