Briefing the Case Lewis v. Vue, James and Toni using/following IRAC format IRAC ---> I=Issue R=Rule A=Application C=Conclusion

Vuo, Inc. is a successful, world-wide appliance manufacturer. One of their products is a microwave oven specially designed to be installed in motorhomes manufactured by James Automobile Company, Inc. Vuo and Jaimes got reports that the microwaves were causing fires in motorhomes. Vuo tested the product and found no incidence of spontaneous combustion, but did discover that the units could, very occasionally, spontaneously turn on. This would not present a safety hazard, however, since any heat would be absorbed in the nonflammable walls of the microwave.

Toni owned a Jaimes motorhome and stored blankets in the microwave. The spontaneous ignition of the microwave ignited the blankets, causing a fire. This, then, explained how the fires were occurring: when the oven spontaneously turned on, it was “cooking” whatever items were being stored in the oven. In Toni’s case, the fire ignited the motorhome, which burst in flames, injuring a neighboring camper who had no relationship to Toni: Lewis.

Vuo and Jaimes had never warned buyers not to store items in the microwaves. In Lewis v. Vuo, Jaimes and Toni, what result? Separately discuss any causes of action, defenses and remedies.