Hi Everyone,

In Welge v. Planters Lifesavers, Welge was given a jar of peanuts by Godfrey. While Welge was replacing the cap on the jar the second time the jar was in use, the jar shattered, injuring his hand. The courts were to determine when the defect was introduced. Based on the testimonies of Welge and Godfrey, the jar "was not ... jostled, dropped, bumped, or otherwise subjected to stress beyond what is to be expected in the ordinary use of the product" (Kubasek et al., 2020, p.257). Therefore, the defect was introduced before the plaintiffs obtained the jar.

Justice Posner used res ipsa loquitur to show the liability of the defendants. While res ipsa loquitur does not necessarily show negligence of the defendant, it can show "that an accident can itself be evidence of liability" (Kubasek et al., 2020, p.258). Since this particular accident could not happen without a defect in the product and Welge and Godfrey did not introduce the defect, the liability then falls on the defendants.

I agree with Justice Posner's decision. According to Godfrey, she transported the jar to Welge without any incidents. A typical jar should be able to endure the trip from the shelf to the shopping cart, to the cashier, and through the drive home without issue. I could not find any evidence that an exacto knife can cut glass. Therefore, based on Godfrey's and Welge's interactions with the jar, it is unlikely they caused the defect.

Kubasek,N., Browne,M.N., Dhooge,L.J., Herron,D.J., Williamson,C., & Barkacs,L.L. (2020).Dynamic business law(5th ed.).

need a rely to this discussion post