About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

9 J.C. & U.L. 209 (1982-1983)
Negligent Publishing: Implications for University Publishers

handle is hein.journals/jcolunly9 and id is 221 raw text is: NEGLIGENT PUBLISHING: IMPLICATIONS FOR UNIVERSITY PUBLISHERS DONALD WALLIS* I. INTRODUCTION On September 4, 1980, a jury in the U.S. District Court in Spr- ingfield, Massachusetts awarded Carolyn Carter $100,000 in her suit against Rand McNally Publishing Company.' Carolyn Carter, an eighth grade chemistry student, had been severely burned during a chemistry class while attempting an experiment described in a textbook published by Rand McNally. This experiment called for the use of methyl alcohol, a highly inflammable substance. The plaintiff argued, and the jury agreed, that her injuries were caused, in part, by the publishing company's negligent failure to test the experiments in the textbook and by the publisher's failure to adequately warn students and teachers about the dangerous qualities of these experiments. Rand McNally did not appeal the verdict. This case is of special interest to publishing companies because it is the first time a book has been considered a product and the first time products liability theory has been used to impose liability upon a publishing house for an injury caused by technical information contained within a textbook.2 This note will examine products liability law and attempt to deter- mine whether Carter v. Rand McNally & Co. is within the mainstream of evolving products liability theory (and therefore of considerable precedential value) or whether the case is merely an unusual abberation (and therefore of little precedential value). Then the implications of this * Associate, Stringer & Grant, Chattanooga, Tennessee; J.D., 1982, West Virginia University; M.A., 1974, Marshall University; B.A., 1970, University of Virginia. 1 Carter v. Rand McNally & Co., No. 76-1864-F (D. Mass. September 4, 1980). This case was reported in the following newspapers: Holyoke Transcript-Telegram, Sept. 4 and Sept. 5, 1980; Srpingfield Union, Sept. 15, 1980. The case was discussed in the following journals: 17 Trial 89 (1981) and Butler's 7 (1981). 22 Chronicle of Higher Education 13 (1981). This case is also referred to in SWARTZ, HAZARDOUS PRODUCT LITIGATION 16, 21 (1981 Cum. Supp.). 2 Chronicle of Higher Education, supra at 13.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most