General Motors Corporation, Petitioner v. Maria G. Saenz

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that General Motors had a duty to warn of overloading and breached that duty, but the breach was not a producing cause of the accident because there was no evidence the inadequate warning caused the loss. The Court also limited the Magro presumption, stating it does not apply when a warning is inadequate. Two dissenting opinions argue that the majority erodes consumer product safety law and that the duty to warn should not extend to all possible modifications.