13-1423. Strict products liability; component part.

            "Products liability" applies to the supplier of [a component part] [material intended for further processing] which causes injury if, when added to or incorporated into the finished product, the [component part] [material] is substantially unchanged or is in a condition in which it could have been reasonably expected to be used.

            For substantial change in the [component part] [material] to relieve a supplier of liability, the change itself must be a cause of the harm done.

                                                  DIRECTIONS FOR USE

            This instruction must be used only where a defendant is a supplier of a component of the final product or a product which undergoes further processing and sufficient evidence has been introduced to permit a finding that substantial change in the component is a cause of the plaintiff's injury. The appropriate bracketed language should be selected.

            As with the issue covered by UJI 13-1422 NMRA, the issue submitted by this instruction may require expansion of UJI 13-1401. See UJI 13-1422, directions for use.

                                               COMMITTEE COMMENT

            Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A took no position on the application of strict liability in tort to suppliers of component parts and products sold for further processing. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A, comments p and q. The Restatement predicts that where no change occurs in the component itself, but it is merely incorporated into something larger, strict liability will carry through to the ultimate consumer. This prediction was proved accurate. First Nat'l Bank v. Nor-Am Agrl. Prods., Inc., 88 N.M. 74, 86, 537 P.2d 682, 694 (Ct. App. 1975). The comments under UJI 13-1422 are applicable here; proof that the component has reached the consumer in substantially the same condition as that in which it was supplied is an element of plaintiff's case. Union Supply Co. v. Pust, 196 Colo. 162, 583 P.2d 276, 282-3 (1978). Here again, however, the element comes to the jury's attention in the context of a claim of change or further processing, as a cause of plaintiff's injury.