In Ohio, under what condition can a manufacturer's subsequent remedial measures be admitted in a strict liability case?

In Ohio, a manufacturer's subsequent remedial measures can be admitted in a strict liability case to indicate the existence of a defect in the product. This principle acknowledges that if a manufacturer has taken steps to remedy a defect after an incident has occurred, this action can be relevant evidence suggesting that a defect existed prior to the incident.

The rationale behind this is that subsequent remedial measures are typically seen as an acknowledgment of a problem that the manufacturer is addressing. Therefore, in contexts where the existence of a defect is at issue, the fact that a manufacturer has made changes or improvements can help establish that such defects were present previously, thus supporting a strict liability claim.

This nuanced understanding of the admissibility of evidence is fundamental in strict liability cases, where the focus is on the product itself and whether it was defectively designed or manufactured, rather than on the behavior or negligence of the manufacturer.