Case Notes

Amendment to Complaint Appropriate When Defendant Allegedly Knew of Defect

Leave is granted to amend a complaint for punitive damages where the plaintiffs represent that the defendant was aware of a defect in the product prior to its sale to them. Dewick v. Maytag, No. 03 C 1548, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Dec. 17, 2003.

The Dewicks sued Maytag after their 10-month-old son was seriously burned when he crawled inside the broiler section of a kitchen range manufactured by Maytag. After the commencement of the litigation, the Dewicks moved to amend their complaint by adding a claim for punitive damages based upon Maytag's conduct. In their motion for leave to amend their complaint, the Dewicks alleged that Maytag was aware of the problems with the broiler prior to their son's injury because earlier and substantially similar incidents had occurred with the same range model. They further alleged that despite knowledge of these incidents, Maytag did not properly investigate. Nevertheless, Maytag decided to redesign the range after these other incidents, but prior to when the Dewicks purchased their range and their son was injured.

The district court granted the Dewicks leave to amend. It held that Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides district courts with wide discretion to permit plaintiffs to amend their complaints. It considered that punitive damages are appropriate if a defendant committed a tort under circumstances showing fraud, actual malice, deliberate violence or oppression or where the defendant acted willfully or with gross negligence as to indicate a wanton disregard of the rights of others. The district court concluded that based upon the Dewicks' representations that the range was defective and that Maytag may have had sufficient notice of the defect prior to the Dewicks' purchase of the range, it would be improvident to restrict the Dewicks from including a claim for punitive damages.

Amendment to Complaint Appropriate When Defendant Allegedly Knew of Defect

Leave is granted to amend a complaint for punitive damages where the plaintiffs represent that the defendant was aware of a defect in the product prior to its sale to them. Dewick v. Maytag , No. 03 C 1548, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Dec. 17, 2003.

The Dewicks sued Maytag after their 10-month-old son was seriously burned when he crawled inside the broiler section of a kitchen range manufactured by Maytag. After the commencement of the litigation, the Dewicks moved to amend their complaint by adding a claim for punitive damages based upon Maytag's conduct. In their motion for leave to amend their complaint, the Dewicks alleged that Maytag was aware of the problems with the broiler prior to their son's injury because earlier and substantially similar incidents had occurred with the same range model. They further alleged that despite knowledge of these incidents, Maytag did not properly investigate. Nevertheless, Maytag decided to redesign the range after these other incidents, but prior to when the Dewicks purchased their range and their son was injured.

The district court granted the Dewicks leave to amend. It held that Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides district courts with wide discretion to permit plaintiffs to amend their complaints. It considered that punitive damages are appropriate if a defendant committed a tort under circumstances showing fraud, actual malice, deliberate violence or oppression or where the defendant acted willfully or with gross negligence as to indicate a wanton disregard of the rights of others. The district court concluded that based upon the Dewicks' representations that the range was defective and that Maytag may have had sufficient notice of the defect prior to the Dewicks' purchase of the range, it would be improvident to restrict the Dewicks from including a claim for punitive damages.