The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that a warning in English was adequate as a matter of law. In Farias v. Mr. Heater, Inc., 684 F.3d 1231 (11th Cir. 2012) the plaintiff sued the manufacturer and seller of a portable infrared propane heater alleging negligent failure to warn against the dangers of indoor usage and for a failure to have the warning in the Spanish language. The plaintiff used two of the heaters inside her home and neglected to close the valve on one of the propane tanks before going to sleep. The room caught on fire causing over $300,000.00 in damages. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant on the basis that the warnings were adequate as a matter of law to warn of the dangers of indoor use and that it was not necessary that the warnings also be given in Spanish.
On appeal the plaintiff contended that the court erred in finding the warnings adequate as a matter of law and that this issue should have been left for the jury’s determination. The Court of Appeals, after reviewing the instructions both in the instruction manual and on the box in which the heater came, determined that the warnings made it clear that it was unsafe to use the heater in living areas and that the misuse of the heater could cause not only fire but also property damage. The court said:
“Those warnings are provided in bold and capital letters and contain the headings “WARNING.” We find these warnings to be “of such intensity as to cause a reasonable man to exercise for his own safety caution commiserate with the potential danger” of the fire that occurred due to Farias’ misuse of the heater” (p 123 – 6)
The court then turned to the issue of whether the failure to warn in Spanish was a question of fact for the jury. The court held that the district court was correct in holding that as a matter of law a Spanish warning was not necessary. The Court of Appeals held that since the plaintiffs had not produced any evidence showing that Mr. Heater was specifically marketed in any way to Spanish-speaking customers through the use of Hispanic media that it was not error to rule that the English warning was adequate as a matter of law.
(Thanks to John Wagener of Chicago for submitting this decision)