Products Liability Law Reporter

A federal district court rejected a defense motion to exclude expert opinions offered by the plaintiff’s proffered standard of care expert in a case arising out of a failed tree stand.

Here, James Rowedder was injured when the Field & Stream Stealth Climber tree stand he was using failed. He sued manufacturer Primal Vantage Co., Inc., and seller Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc., alleging claims for negligence-product defect, breach of warranty, and strict liability. The defendants moved to exclude opinions offered by the plaintiff’s proffered expert Rick Brenner, who was to testify on the standard of care and best practices for consumer products manufacturers and how Primal allegedly failed to meet these standards. The defense argued that Brenner was not qualified to offer these opinions because he was not an engineer, was not familiar with tree stands, and had not physically examined the evidence.

Denying the motion, the district court concluded that Brenner was qualified to offer opinions on standard of care and best practices for consumer product manufacturers or importers based on his extensive experience as a manufacturer, importer, and product safety professional, including his position as CEO of a company that distributed consumer products from multiple overseas factories. The expert’s opinions would be based on his relevant knowledge and experience, the court said, noting that his testimony may not opine on whether the product at issue was defective. Brenner may testify, generally, about what he believes constitutes best practices for a product manufacturer or importer and how Primal did not live up to those standards, the court held.

Citation: Rowedder v. Primal Vantage Co., 2024 WL 3424724 (D.S.C. July 15, 2024).

Plaintiff counsel: Derek D. Tarver, AAJ member Ronnie L. Crosby, and AAJ member John E. Parker Jr., all of Hampton, S.C.; and Robert B. Vannoy, Moncks Corner, S.C.