Linda McCathern v. Toyota Motor Corp. et al.,
(CC 9601-00689) (CA A98578) (SC S46683)

On May 10, 2001, the Oregon Supreme Court unanimously held that the consumer expectations test is the controlling test for product liability design defect cases in Oregon.

Plaintiff Linda McCathern was injured when the 1994 Toyota 4Runner automobile in which she was riding as a passenger rolled over. Plaintiff sued defendants, the manufacturer, distributor, and seller of the 4Runner, alleging that the 1994 4Runner was dangerously defective and unreasonably dangerous because its design rendered it unstable and prone to roll over. The jury returned a verdict in plaintiff's favor and awarded noneconomic damages totaling $2,250,000 and economic damages totaling $5,400,000.

In a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or, in the alternative, a new trial, defendants challenged the jury's verdict, claiming that plaintiff had failed to provide sufficient evidence that the 1994 4Runner was defectively designed. Both the circuit court and the Court of Appeals held that plaintiff's proof was sufficient. The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, affirmed.

Writing for the Court, Justice Theodore R. Kulongoski held that the controlling standard for design-defect liability in Oregon is the consumer expectations test. When a plaintiff alleges that a product is "in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer," ORS 30.920(1), the plaintiff must prove that, when the product left the defendant's hands, the product was defective and dangerous to an extent beyond that which the ordinary consumer would expect.

Applying that standard to the record before the jury in this proceeding, the court went on to hold that plaintiff's evidence was sufficient to support the jury verdict in her favor.

To read about the Oregon Supreme Court's 1999 striking down of non-economic damage caps as unconstitutional, click here.