Despite acknowledging a lack of safety features, the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently ruled in favor of a machinery seller, dismissing negligence claims for selling a forklift without safety features in the case of Morello v. Kenco Toyota Lift.

Defendant Kenco Toyota Lift sold a forklift to Jet Plastica, a manufacturer of plasticware. Plaintiff Joseph Morella worked for Jet Plastica and injured his leg when a forklift driver by a co-worker struck him. Morella used Kenco, arguing it had an obligation to inform the buyer that safety features should have been included in the purchase. Judge Kearney rejected this argument, stating Morello’s theory would require that machinery salespeople know and anticipate “a wide range of conduct in their buyer’s dynamics based largely on speculation,” and ultimately deciding that Kenco was not negligent in selling the forklift without the optional backup alarms, strobe lights, and rearview mirrors.

Morello also argued that the need for safety features for forklifts has been recognized by many industry safety authorities and standard setting organizations. Judge Kearney also rejected this argument, citing a case in which the court held that industry standards have no bearing on the issue of whether a duty was owed, and that such standards may instead be admissible on the issue of standard of care.

Thanks to Chelsea Rendelman for her contribution to this post and please write to Mike Bono for more information.