Yanmar America Corp. v. Nichols, [Ms. 1130214, Sept. 30, 2014] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2014). A Yanmar tractor
rolled over and injured Nichols. The tractor was made for the Japanese
market but was imported to America as a "gray market" tractor.
Nichols argued that Yanmar America Corporation undertook a duty to warn
American customers of the dangers of using such tractors in America. After
a verdict and judgment for Nichols, Yanmar America appealed. The Supreme
Court holds that Yanmar America did undertake such a duty and that the
duty extended to Nichols, who did not buy the tractor in question. However,
the Court applies the test for voluntary undertaking, focusing on the
element requiring that the defendant's "failure to exercise reasonable
care increases the risk of such harm," and holds that Yanmar's
failure to do more to warn American customers and users did not increase
the risk to Mr. Nichols. The Court concludes that Mr. Nichols "failed
to establish by substantial evidence that Yanmar America participated
in an activity that increased his risk of harm over any risk of harm that
would have existed had Yanmar America chosen not to warn potential users
of the gray-market tractors in this case." The Court reverses for
entry of a judgment as a matter of law for Yanmar America. This is a plurality
opinion with four Justices on the main opinion. Justice Parker expresses
doubt "that the 'increases the risk of such harm' standard
... applies to any and all voluntary-warning situations." Justice
Murdock concurs in the result, not being persuaded that Yanmar America
undertook "a duty to warn any person ... who did not happen upon
its Web site postings or actually receive one of its mailings."
Related Documents: yanmar_93013