Winter v. G.P. Putnam's Sons

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991 · Torts

938 F.2d 1033 (9th Cir. 1991)

Updated July 23, 2026

TortsProducts liabilityNegligencePublisher liabilitystrict liabilitybooksideas and expressionpublisher

Facts

The Encyclopedia of Mushrooms is a reference guide on mushroom habitat, collection, and cooking, written by two British authors and originally published in Britain. Defendant Putnam purchased copies from the British publisher and distributed the finished book in the United States; Putnam neither wrote nor edited it. Plaintiffs bought the book, relied on its descriptions to decide which wild mushrooms were safe to eat, and became critically ill after eating their harvest, ultimately requiring liver transplants. Plaintiffs alleged the book contained erroneous and misleading information about identifying deadly mushroom species and sought recovery on strict products liability, warranty, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and false representation theories.

Issue

Whether the information and ideas contained in a book can be treated as a product for purposes of strict products liability, and whether a publisher has a duty to investigate the accuracy of a book's contents or to provide warnings disclaiming completeness or accuracy.

Rule

Strict products liability applies to tangible products, not to the ideas and expression contained in a book. Absent a special undertaking or guarantee, a publisher has no legal duty to investigate the accuracy of the contents of books it publishes, and no duty to provide warnings that would effectively require such an investigation.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Portland, Oregon, Nina Velez bought a printed home-foraging guide distributed by Cedar Hollow Press, a fictional publisher. The guide incorrectly stated that a certain berry was safe to eat, and Nina suffered kidney damage after following the guide.

If Nina sues Cedar Hollow Press on a strict products liability theory based on the inaccurate content of the guide, what is the strongest argument for the publisher?

Explanation. The governing rule is that strict products liability applies to tangible products, not to the ideas and expression contained in a book. Even though the book is physically sold and the reader suffered bodily injury, the alleged defect is in the informational content, which is not treated as a product for § 402A-style strict liability.