William Greenman was injured when his Shopsmith combination power tool threw off a piece of wood that struck him in the head. He sued the manufacturer, claiming that he had followed the product instructions and that the product must be defective. In a landmark decision, Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.,20 the California Supreme Court set out the reason for applying tort law rather than contract law in cases involving consumers who were injured by defective products. According to the Greenman court, the "purpose of such liability is to [e]nsure that the costs of injuries resulting from defective products are borne by the manufacturers . . . rather than by the injured persons who are powerless to protect themselves." Today, the majority of states recognize strict product liability, although some state courts limit its application to situations involving personal injuries (rather than property damage).

Note: Can you please answer this question using IRAC( Issue, Rule of Law, Analysis, and Conclusion) format. Because then it will be easy for me to understand the case a a lot better.