## Facts

- Leo L. Dolinski bought a bottled soft drink (“Squirt”) from a workplace vending machine.
- After opening the bottle and drinking part of it, he became ill.
- The bottle was later found to contain a decomposed mouse, including hair and feces.
- Dolinski experienced nausea and related physical discomfort, sought medical care, and reported ongoing mental distress and an aversion to soft drinks.
- The manufacturer and distributor was Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Company.

## Issues

1. Whether Nevada should recognize strict tort liability against a manufacturer/distributor for injuries caused by a defective bottled beverage, without privity and without proof of negligence.
2. Whether the evidence permitted a finding that the product was defective and that the defect existed when the bottle left the defendant’s control.
3. Whether the trial court properly admitted opinion testimony from a psychiatrist who did not treat the plaintiff.

## Decision

- The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for Dolinski.
- The court adopted strict tort liability for manufacturers and distributors who place bottled beverages on the market in a dangerous defective condition.
- The court held the evidence sufficient for the jury to find the bottle was defective and that the contamination was present when it left Shoshone’s possession.
- The court upheld admission of the non-treating psychiatrist’s expert opinion; lack of treatment affected weight, not admissibility.

## Legal Principles

- A manufacturer/distributor is strictly liable when it places a product on the market in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user, even if it exercised reasonable care and lacked contractual privity with the user.
- Strict liability does not relieve the plaintiff of proof; the plaintiff must establish (1) injury caused by a product defect and (2) that the defect existed when the product left the defendant’s hands.
- The existence of a defect and its presence at the time of sale/distribution may be proven by circumstantial evidence supporting a reasonable inference of contamination before the product reached the consumer.
- Qualified expert testimony on mental condition is admissible even if the expert did not provide treatment; objections based on non-treatment generally go to credibility and weight.

## Conclusion

Nevada recognized strict products liability in tort for defective bottled beverages and affirmed a consumer’s verdict where circumstantial evidence supported that a decomposed mouse contaminated the drink before it left the bottler’s control, while reiterating that plaintiffs must still prove defect and causation.


Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Dolinski, 420 P.2d 855 (Nev. 1966)