Petersen v. Raymond Corp., 994 F.3d 1224 (10th Cir. Apr. 22, 2021)

The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment to the defendant forklift manufacturer in this products liability case, based on the plaintiff’s failure to provide admissible expert testimony showing that a safer, feasible alternative design existed at the time of his injury.  The court held that the district court properly excluded expert testimony proffered by the plaintiff where the expert provided only generalized opinions that the forklift would have been safer if it had a door on it, but did not provide details about a feasible design alternative.