Products liability–Jackson vs. General Motors Corp.: Tennessee authorized consumer expectation test for all cases in which product is alleged to be unreasonably dangerous
In Ray by Holman v. BIC Corp. ,55 the Tennessee Supreme Court once again addressed the question of the appropriate test for an unreasonably dangerous product.56 The plaintiff in BIC alleged that under the consumer expectation test a disposable cigarette lighter was unreasonably dangerous “because it was not childresistant.”57 Following summary judgment for the defendant by the district court, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals certified the following question to the Tennessee Supreme Court: “[W]nether Tenn. Code Ann. (sec) 29-28-102(8), in addition to the `consumer expectation’ test, provides for another separate and distinct test for determining whether a product is `unreasonably dangerous,’ i.e., the `risk-utility’ test.”58