GRSM Wins Complete Defense Verdict in Mississippi Product Liability Jury Trial

The case began following a playground incident at an elementary school, in which a minor was pushed from a platform leading to a slide, suffering a broken arm and undergoing subsequent surgery and therapy. In her lawsuit, among other things, the plaintiff asserted claims under the Mississippi Product Liability Act against the manufacturer of the playground system, alleging that the system was defectively designed. In turn, that manufacturer asserted an “innocent seller” claim in a third-party complaint against GRSM’s client, which manufactured the slide component of the system, arguing that any defect was the responsibility of the slide manufacturer.

As discovery proceeded, the plaintiff made claims that GRSM’s client should have designed the slide with either a hood or a tube and that the slide was designed with a flawed length-to-height ratio. The plaintiff also asserted that GRSM’s client should have provided a stronger warning to ensure that the installers of its slide adhered strictly to the design specifications. The plaintiff contended that but for these flaws, the minor’s fall and injury would have been prevented.

However, at trial, the jury heard evidence that the slide not only met the applicable international design standards at the time it was manufactured, but also that it had never been the subject of a recall or other complaint by the federal government. Additionally, the plaintiff’s expert mechanical engineer, who had never designed playground equipment or consulted on the development of playground systems, admitted to never having inspected the slide at issue or even an exemplar of such a slide.

Despite the plaintiff’s claim of $3 million in compensatory damages, the jury deliberated for less than an hour before returning a unanimous defense verdict on all claims, determining that the playground structure, including the slide, was not defective and that the warnings provided were indeed adequate.