Opinion ID: 1696091
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Warnings.

Text: The plaintiff also claims the trampoline did not incorporate adequate warnings and that a genuine issue of fact was generated on that issue. Under the Restatement, a product is defective because of inadequate instructions or warnings when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the provision of reasonable instructions or warnings by the seller or other distributor, or a predecessor in the commercial chain of distribution, and the omission of the instructions or warnings renders the product not reasonably safe. Restatement § 2(c). The trampoline in this case, and its surrounding fun ring, together provide numerous warnings. Three warnings are placed permanently on the pad of the trampoline and advise the user: WARNING Do not land on head or neck. Paralysis or death can result, even if you land in the middle of the trampoline mat (bed). To reduce the chance of landing on your head or neck, do not do somersaults (flips). Only one person at a time on trampoline. Multiple jumpers increase the chances of loss of control, collision, and falling off. This can result in broken head, neck, back, or leg. This trampoline is not recommended for children under 6 years of age. These warnings also include nationally recognized warning symbols cautioning against those activities. During manufacture, Jumpking also places one warning on each of the eight legs of the trampoline, and the design is such that the only way to assemble the trampoline is to have these warnings facing out so they are visible to the user. Jumpking further manufactures two printed (nonpictorial) warnings that are sewn onto the trampoline bed itself. It also provides a warning placard for the owner to affix to the trampoline that contains both the pictorial warning and the language regarding safe use of the trampoline, and it provides an owner's manual that contains the warnings as found on the trampoline as well as additional warnings regarding supervision and education. It is undisputed that these warnings exceed the warnings required by the American Society for Testing and Material (ASTM). Warnings are also provided with the fun ring. Jumpking provides eight warning stickers to be placed on the legs of the fun ring during assembly, and Shelley Tatro recalls installing them as directed. Jumpking provided extra warnings on the fun ring because it was aware that the fun ring may partially cover warnings on the legs of the trampoline. It also provides a warning placard with the fun ring to be placed at the door of the fun ring containing the pictorial warnings and additional language required by the ASTM. The fun ring comes with a separate owner's manual that provides additional warnings. The Restatement recognizes that users must pay some attention for their own safety: Society does not benefit from products that are excessively safefor example, automobiles designed with maximum speeds of 20 miles per hourany more than it benefits from products that are too risky. Society benefits most when the right, or optimal, amount of product safety is achieved. From a fairness perspective, requiring individual users and consumers to bear appropriate responsibility for proper product use prevents careless users and consumers from being subsidized by more careful users and consumers, when the former are paid damages out of funds to which the latter are forced to contribute through higher product prices. Restatement § 2 cmt. a (emphasis added). In this case, it is undisputed that the three warnings affixed to the pad of the trampoline and the placards that came with both the trampoline and the fun ring warned against the specific conduct in which the plaintiff was engaged at the time of his injury, i.e., attempting somersaults or flips. We conclude that a reasonable fact finder could not conclude that the defendant's warnings were inadequate, and we affirm the district court's summary judgment on that claim. Because we find summary judgment was properly ordered on the grounds discussed, we do not address the plaintiff's open and obvious argument. AFFIRMED.