202, that require[1] a fact finder to consider or assess the negligence or fault of nonparties, violate the Arkansas Constitution, when considered along with the modification of "joint and several" liability in the same act, codified at Ark. Code Ann. § 16-55-201.
- Under the facts of this case, whether the provisions of Act 649 of 2003, including, but not limited to those codified at Ark. Code Ann. § 16-55-212(b), that addresses evidence of damages for the costs of necessary medical care, treatment, or services, violate the Arkansas Constitution.
As to the first question, we conclude that the answer is yes, Ark. Code Ann. § 16-55-202 is unconstitutional. As to the second question, we conclude that the answer is yes, Ark. Code Ann. § 16-55-212(b) is unconstitutional.
According to the district court's order, the certified questions arise from a complaint filed by petitioner Darrell Johnson alleging that on or about February 24, 2004, Johnson was injured while working as a control systems mechanic for Eastman Chemical Company. The district court's order reveals the following facts. At the time of the incident, Johnson was working on a product referred to by Johnson and his co-workers as an Allen-Bradley "starter bucket." The starter bucket was designed, manufactured, and supplied to Eastman by the respondent Rockwell Automation, Inc.
Petitioners alleged before the district court that a safety interlock on the starter bucket was designed, manufactured, and supplied in a defective condition, allowing it to become electrically powered at a time it should have been prevented from doing so, which was an actual and proximate cause of the incident and Johnson's injuries. As a result, petitioners
- ↑ While the question was phrased by the parties and the district court using the word "allow" rather than "require," the statute itself uses the word "shall," clearly mandating the consideration of the fault of nonparties.
