FORD v. POLARIS INDUSTRIES
Filed 5/18/06
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
SUSAN FORD et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. POLARIS INDUSTRIES, INC., et al., Defendants and Appellants. | A106375 (Napa County Super. Ct. No. 26-18577) |
Story Continued from Part I ………
Nor does Sanchez aid Polaris. In Sanchez the injured college pitcher pursued negligence and products liability claims against a bat manufacturer. He alleged that the newly design bat, made of hollow aluminum alloy with a pressurized air bladder, significantly increased the inherent risk that a pitcher would be hit by a line drive. (Sanchez v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co., supra, 104 Cal.App.4th at p. 707.) The reviewing court rejected primary assumption of the risk as shielding the manufacturer and reversed summary judgment because the plaintiff's evidence raised a triable issue whether the design increased the inherent risk. (Id. at p. 715.) As the court further explained: â€
