Kinserlow v. CMI Corp., Bid-Well Div.

Kinserlow (plaintiff), a Fred Weber, Inc. employee, was injured falling from an unmarked workbridge and sued CMI Corporation, Bid-Well Division (Bid-Well) (defendant), asserting Bid-Well - rather than competitor Gomaco - manufactured it, relying on circumstantial evidence that paving machines and workbridges were typically kept together, that his employer had not purchased a Gomaco workbridge from the area's exclusive distributor, and that post-1984 Gomaco workbridges had features (metal triangles, no tapered ends) unlike the one involved. Bid-Well countered with evidence that Gomaco had sold tapered-end workbridges since 1968, had not added metal triangles until 1984, and that Bid-Well itself had never made tapered-end workbridges; the district court found the evidence roughly balanced but granted Bid-Well judgment as a matter of law since Kinserlow bore the burden of production, and Kinserlow appealed.