Vincent Amatulli, Jr., an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Lorraine Amatulli v. Delhi Construction…

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division, holding that the pool manufacturer was not strictly liable because the pool was designed for above‑ground use and the in‑ground installation constituted a material alteration creating a new danger, and that the owners/installers were not entitled to summary judgment because genuine issues of fact remain as to proximate cause and alleged design defects. Justice Titone, dissenting in part and concurring in part, argued that the manufacturer should be liable based on a foreseeable in‑ground installation and the adequacy of warnings.