|
2377 A restaurant's failure to inform a patron that there was MSG in soup made the soup defective, if MSG is an ingredient to which a substantial number of people are allergic, and the danger is not generally known or the consumer would reasonably not expect to find MSG in the soup, and the seller knew or should have known of the presence of the MSG and the resulting danger.CitationLIVINGSTON v MARIE CALLENDERS (Hidden Ingredient) 72 CA4 830 [See: Greenman v Yuba 59 C2 57; Anderson v Owens-Corning 53 C3 987; Carlin v Superior Court 13 C4 1104, T/AT 10/96; McKinney v Revlon 2 CA4 602; Oakes v DuPont 272 CA2 645; Harris v Belton 258 CA2 595; Magee v Wyeth 214 CA2 340; Briggs v National 92 CA2 542; REST 2d Torts 402A, comm j; REST 3d Torts 2 comm k]
|
|
