Products Liability Law Reporter

A federal district court held that a retailer was not liable for breach of implied warranty to a shopper who was injured when a shopping cart tipped over.

Doretta King used a shopping cart while purchasing items at a Missouri Wal-Mart store. After making her purchase, she pushed the cart away from the register. A wheel came off the cart, and it tipped over. King, who was holding onto the cart, was injured when she fell to the concrete floor. She and her husband sued Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, alleging negligence and breach of implied warranty for a particular purpose. King’s husband also sued for loss of consortium. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiffs’ breach-of-warranty claim.

Granting the motion, the district court noted that the plaintiffs’ claim for implied warranty is governed by Mo. Rev. Stat. §400.2-315, which establishes an implied warranty by a seller that goods shall be fit for any known purpose for which the goods are required by a buyer. The court found that King’s use of the shopping cart is more like a bailment than a sale in that the defendant had allowed her to use its property for the purpose of grocery shopping without any change in title. Thus, the court concluded, §400.2-315 does not apply.

The court also found that according to the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Prods. Liab. §20, markets that supply shopping carts are not subject to strict products liability for harm caused by defects in those items.

Consequently, the court concluded that absent another theory of liability, the plaintiffs’ implied warranty claims may not proceed.

Citation: King v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, 2023 WL 156856 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 11, 2023).