New Hampshire
How Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts — Products Liability (Failure to Warn).
New Hampshire adopts a modified version of the Restatement (Third) of Torts for products liability cases, including failure to warn claims. The state emphasizes that manufacturers have a duty to provide adequate warnings about the risks associated with their products.
A manufacturer is liable for failure to warn if the product is unreasonably dangerous due to a lack of adequate warnings, and the manufacturer knew or should have known of the potential harm.
The court held that the warning given by the manufacturer was insufficient to inform users of the significant risk associated with the drug, thereby establishing liability for failure to warn.
In this case, the court reiterated that a product's danger should have been known by a reasonable manufacturer, thus supporting claims of failure to warn when adequate information was not provided.
The ruling highlighted that a product's design defect, combined with inadequate warnings, can lead to liability if it can be shown that a reasonable manufacturer would have acted differently.
New Hampshire's approach aligns closely with the federal standard established by the Third Restatement of Torts, emphasizing that the duty to warn extends to foreseeable risks. However, New Hampshire courts have uniquely focused on the reasonableness standard specific to local manufacturing practices.
Questions regarding failure to warn and products liability based on New Hampshire case law such as Anderson are commonplace on the New Hampshire bar exam, focusing on the duties of manufacturers.