While the evolution of strict products liability has not generated as much jurisprudence in Ohio as it has in other states, the Ohio law that has evolved clearly reflects the national confusion. Frequently, the confusion both nationally and in Ohio results from the courts' failure to adequately separate the many issues that arise in a strict products liability action. The purpose of this Note is to focus on one narrow issue in Ohio strict products liability law-the admissibility of state of the art evidence. The Ohio Supreme Court has never addressed this question, and other jurisdictions are split on the issue. Although it is impossible to completely extricate the issue of the admissibility of state of the art evidence from other strict products liability concerns, the Note attempts, at least as much as possible, to isolate the state of the art thread as it travels through the cases, and deals with related "threads" only when they become seemingly inextricably entwined with the state of the art issue.
Note, State of the Art Evidence under Ohio Strict Products Liability Law, 36 Clev. St. L. Rev. 105 (1988)