Question: Richard Jimenez was injured when a disc for the handheld electric disc grinder he had purchased from Sears Roebuck shattered while he used the grinder to smooth down a steel weld. When Jimenez brought a strict liability lawsuit against Sears, the defendant argued that he had misused the grinder, and that this misuse caused his injury. Assuming that Sears was right, what effect would this have in a state that has not adopted comparative negligence or comparative fault? What effect would it have in a comparative fault state?