Products Liability Law Reporter

The Alabama Supreme Court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply to the negligence claims of a bystander who was injured when the left rear tire of a passing vehicle suddenly detached.

Antwon Aaron hired Ryan Pettway to install after-market wheel rims and tires on his vehicle. The job required stud-containing wheel adapters, and Aaron bought these from a discount tire store, providing them to Pettway for installation. Less than a day after Aaron picked up his vehicle from Pettway, its left rear tire came off unexpectedly, injuring Cedrick Nettles, who was standing nearby. Pettway later determined that three of the five studs on the left rear adapter had sheared off completely, and two had broken.

Nettles sued Pettway, alleging his negligent installation of the wheel assembly and tire had led to the detachment and his injuries. The defendant moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted after a proceeding in which the plaintiff asserted res ipsa loquitur. The plaintiff then moved unsuccessfully to amend the motion or vacate the judgment, and the plaintiff appealed.

Affirming, the state high court noted that negligence may be inferred under certain circumstances if the res ipsa loquitur doctrine applies. A plaintiff asserting the doctrine must show that the defendant had full control over the injury-causing instrumentality, the circumstances are such that the incident could not have happened absent the negligence of those in control, and the plaintiff’s injury resulted from the incident.& Here, the court said, the defendant testified that the studs could have broken or been damaged by the way Aaron had operated the vehicle, the parts’ latent defects, or road conditions. The plaintiff had provided no evidence to foreclose the possibility that the wheel detachment resulted from one of these factors, the court said. Thus, the court found that one could reasonably conclude that the tire had detached from Aaron’s vehicle absent any negligence on the defendant’s part. Accordingly, dismissal was proper.

Citation: Nettles v. Pettway, 2020 WL 1814593 (Ala. Apr. 10, 2020).