The evidence is not relevant. As you should remember from torts, a defendant's prior notice of a dangerous condition goes to the element of "duty" which is an
element of negligence. Products liability is a strict liability tort, where negligence is not material.
Materiality is also determined by the rules of civil procedure. Under the rules, a complaint will make specific factual and legal allegations, some of which will be admitted in the Answer and some will be denied. Only the ones that are denied form the "disputes" that are material to the lawsuit. For example, suppose Plaintiff sues Ford for injuries suffered when his Excursion rolled over. In his Complaint, he alleged jurisdiction (e.g., the Defendant is a corporation with offices in Indiana and doing substantial business in Indiana); and venue (the accident happened on Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomingon, Indiana. At trial, Plaintiff calls the head of Ford's sales division and asks whether Ford has dealerships all over Indiana. The defendant objects that the evidence is irrelevant. Does the judge have enough information to rule on this objection?