In what circumstances will a plaintiff be able to sue a manufacturer for failing to properly inspect and repair a piece of furniture in order to determine the cause of an accident?

Plaintiffs secondly contend that the instruction was too broad in that it would apply not only to an accident resulting solely from misuse but would also apply to one resulting from both misuse and negligence on defendant's part in design, inspection or workmanship. In other words, plaintiffs contend that the instruction was an erroneous statement of the law concerning concurrent cause. However, the instruction actually had reference to the duty of care of a manufacturer or supplier rather than proximate cause. In such case, the law is that a manufacturer or supplier is liable only when the misuse by a customer is one that is reasonably foreseeable. (See Phillips v. Ogle Aluminum Furniture (1951), 106 Cal.App.2d 650, 654, 235 P.2d 857; Prosser on Torts, p. 503, 84.)