What is the test for finding a manufacturer liable in strict liability in a medical malpractice case?

Since this petition comes to us following the sustaining of defendant's demurrer without leave to amend, we presume the truth of all well-pleaded factual allegations in the complaint and decide whether they state a cause of action. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318, 216 Cal.Rptr. 718, 703 P.2d 58.)

[32 Cal.App.4th 158] If the trial court has deprived a party of an opportunity to plead a cause of action by wrongly sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend, and extraordinary relief may prevent a waste of judicial resources, mandamus will lie to compel the overruling of the demurrer. (Coulter v. Superior Court (1978)

Page 578

A. Strict Liability

There are commonly three types of product defects that may give rise to a claim that the manufacturer of the product should be liable in strict liability. First, there may be a flaw in the manufacturing process, resulting in a product that differs from the manufacturer's intended result. Second, there are products which are perfectly manufactured but are unsafe because of the absence of a safety device, i.e., a defect in design. Third, there are products that are dangerous because they lack adequate warnings or instructions. (Brown v. Superior Court, supra, 44 Cal.3d at p. 1057, 245 Cal.Rptr. 412, 751 P.2d 470.)