id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentence	flesch	summary	cache	txt
inlawrev-4019	Alberts, Joseph R.; Petersen, James; Thornburg, Robert B.	Survey of Recent Developments in Indiana Product Liability Law	2009	74	.pdf	application/pdf	37974	2173	67	[Vol. 42: 1093 and obvious danger remains relevant in Indiana product liability cases even though the 1995 amendments to the IPLA eliminated the so-called open and obvious defense. Bourne is a significant decision for Indiana product liability practitioners because it reinforces at least four important precepts: (1) defective condition and unreasonably dangerous are not interchangeable terms; (2) the concept of open and obvious remains relevant in Indiana product liability law even though it is no longer a stand-alone defense; (3) whether a product presents an unreasonable danger can and should, under the proper circumstances, be decided by ajudge as a matter of law; and (4) a claimant's expert testimony must be sufficient, even at summary judgment stage, to satisfy Indiana's safer, feasible alternative design requirement in cases in which the claimant pursues a design defect claim.	cache/inlawrev-4019.pdf	txt/inlawrev-4019.txt