Kim Lost Control of His Toyota

Kim lost control of his Toyota. The vehicle rolled and he suffered injuries. He sued for design defect because the vehicle lacked electronic stability control, a feature that would have increased his chance of controlling the vehicle so it would not have gone off the road. The appeals court held that:

A) ​use of a risk-benefit analysis about adopting such safety features was not proper in a case of strict liability.
B) ​in cases involving motor vehicles, negligence, not strict liability was the standard to be applied.
C) ​it was appropriate to use a "consumer expectation" analysis in such instances.
D) ​expert testimony about the benefit of such devices would help the jury determine if such devices were to be expected or not by consumers.
E) ​none of the other choices are correct.