Connection lost
Server error
McCabe v. American Honda Motor Co. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A driver sued Honda after her airbag failed to deploy in a crash. The court revived her case, holding that a jury could decide whether the airbag’s failure violated ordinary consumer safety expectations, even without expert testimony from the plaintiff.
Legal Significance: The applicability of the consumer expectation test for design defect depends on the specific circumstances of the product’s failure, not merely the product’s complexity. A defendant seeking summary judgment must negate both the consumer expectation and risk-benefit theories of design defect.
McCabe v. American Honda Motor Co. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff Lucille McCabe was injured when the driver’s side airbag in her Honda Civic failed to deploy during a collision. McCabe alleged the accident was a high-speed, “head-on” collision and that she expected the airbag to deploy for her safety. Defendant Honda moved for summary judgment, submitting an expert declaration from an engineer who reconstructed the accident. The expert concluded the impact occurred at a 35-degree angle with a longitudinal deceleration equivalent to a 4-mph barrier crash, which was outside the airbag’s design parameters for deployment (within 30 degrees and above an 8-12 mph threshold). Honda’s owner’s manual stated the airbag was designed to inflate in a “severe frontal collision.” McCabe opposed the motion with her own testimony and photographs but did not provide a competing expert declaration. The trial court granted summary judgment for Honda, finding the consumer expectation test inapplicable to a complex product like an airbag and that McCabe had failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: In a products liability action concerning the non-deployment of an airbag, can a plaintiff defeat a motion for summary judgment by raising a triable issue of fact under the consumer expectation test without presenting expert testimony?
Yes. The court reversed the grant of summary judgment, holding that McCabe Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptat
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
In a products liability action concerning the non-deployment of an airbag, can a plaintiff defeat a motion for summary judgment by raising a triable issue of fact under the consumer expectation test without presenting expert testimony?
Conclusion
This case affirms that the applicability of the consumer expectation test is Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dol
Legal Rule
A product is defective in design if it either (1) fails to Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ulla
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis focused on the proper application of California's two-pronged test Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupida
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The consumer expectation test for design defect can apply to complex
