## Facts

- Daniel Fallon, a propane delivery driver, used a truck equipped with a power-driven hose reel manufactured by Clifford B. Hannay & Son, Inc.
- Hannay also sold an optional “guide master” device designed to guide the hose during rewinding to reduce entanglement; it added significant cost.
- Fallon’s employer purchased guide masters for some trucks but chose not to equip the truck Fallon used with the device.
- During a delivery, Fallon held the hose while it unreeled as he moved from the truck toward a customer’s tank.
- The hose became entangled on the reel, the reel abruptly locked, and the hose jerked; Fallon lost balance and fell, sustaining serious back injuries.
- Fallon knew the reel could lock if the hose tangled but asserted he did not appreciate that it could pull him down with force.
- Fallon sued the manufacturer for strict products liability (design defect and failure to warn) and breach of warranty, arguing the reel was unreasonably dangerous without the guide master and lacked adequate warnings about the risk of being jerked and knocked down.

## Issues

1. Whether a hose reel is defectively designed because a safety-related device that reduces entanglement is offered as optional equipment rather than included as standard.
2. Whether the manufacturer has a duty to warn about the risk of entanglement and reel lock causing a user to be jerked off balance when the hazard is obvious and known to the employer and users.
3. Whether a plaintiff’s largely conclusory expert affidavit is sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact and defeat a manufacturer’s motion for summary judgment.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division reversed the order denying summary judgment and granted summary judgment to the manufacturer.
- The court held the reel, as sold without the optional guide master, was reasonably safe as a matter of law and not defectively designed.
- The court held no warning duty was shown because the risk of hose tangling and reel lock was open and obvious and known to the employer and users, including the plaintiff.
- The court held plaintiff’s expert submission was conclusory and insufficient to create a triable issue on design defect, failure to warn, or warranty.

## Legal Principles

- A product is not necessarily defectively designed merely because the manufacturer offers an additional safety-related component as optional equipment; the baseline design may be reasonably safe even if an optional device would reduce an occasional risk.
- A manufacturer generally has no duty to warn of dangers that are open and obvious or already known and appreciated by the product’s intended users.
- On summary judgment in a products-liability case, conclusory expert opinions lacking specific technical or factual support do not raise a triable issue sufficient to defeat a well-supported motion.

## Conclusion

The court granted judgment to the manufacturer because the hose reel was reasonably safe without the optional guide device, the entanglement/lock hazard was obvious and known, and the plaintiff’s conclusory expert affidavit did not create a factual dispute on design defect, warning, or warranty liability.


Fallon v. Clifford B. Hannay & Son, Inc., 153 A.D.2d 95, 550 N.Y.S.2d 135 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep’t 1989)