The father-son team of attorneys at the Peyton Law Firm handles personal injury cases throughout West Virginia and Southern Ohio. We represent clients from communities such as Charleston, St. Albans, Winfield, Huntington, Barboursville, Milton, Columbus, Cincinnati and Dayton. Contact us to schedule a free case evaluation.
Dangerous or Defective Products
These days, claims for compensation after an injury are most often made to an insurance company. Usually a formal personal injury lawsuit is not necessary to get a fair settlement. A formal personal injury lawsuit becomes necessary only if the insurance company fails to offer a reasonable settlement amount during negotiations. And even when formal cases are filed, they usually settle before the trial date. Contact the Peyton Law Firm in Nitro, West Virginia, to learn more.
A person who suffered harm while using a product that was manufactured or marketed in a defective or dangerous way may be able to recover damages from the responsible party in a products liability-based personal injury suit.
Products liability law enforces the responsibility of a manufacturer, seller or distributor of goods to compensate users of those goods for injuries caused by defective or dangerous products that it placed into the stream of commerce. The basic idea underlying products liability law is that the companies providing the products are usually in the best position to prevent defective products from entering the marketplace, so if they fail to do so, they should be held accountable.
An experienced and knowledgeable personal injury lawyer at Peyton Law Firm, P.L.L.C. in Nitro, West Virginia, can advise injured persons on whether they may have a claim against a product manufacturer or seller and can help them recover the damages to which they are legally entitled.
The plaintiff’s burden in a dangerous or defective product personal injury case
Although products liability law has evolved over the years, these cases are still challenging for plaintiffs. At one time, “caveat emptor” (literally translated as “buyer beware”) was the standard to which manufacturers were held. Today “strict liability” is imposed in appropriate cases.
Under a strict liability standard, manufacturers are responsible for injuries caused by defective or unreasonably dangerous products even if they were not negligent. In a products liability action, the injured person, or plaintiff, must prove, that there was a design or manufacturing defect in the product, or that the manufacturer did not adequately warn consumers about the product’s possible dangers. In addition, he or she must establish, through relevant and credible evidence, that the product caused the injuries, and that he or she was using the product in the way it was intended to be used (or that the manufacturer should have anticipated that the product could be dangerous if “misused” in the way that it was) at the time the injury occurred.
Manufacturing defects are usually easier to prove than design defects. If a particular consumer’s gas fireplace explodes when first lit, for example, it is evidence that the fireplace was not manufactured as the designer intended it to be. A design-defect case, on the other hand, could arise if many or all fireplaces of a manufacturer’s particular model posed a threat of explosion. In a design defect case, the product may have been manufactured as it was intended to be, but the design was deficient or fundamentally flawed in some way in which to pose unreasonable hazards to consumers.
Proving causation in a products liability case can be tricky. The plaintiff must establish that the product was defective when it left the hands of the defendant manufacturer, distributor or seller, and that the defect was the cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. If the injuries could have arisen from several potential causes, the plaintiff usually must establish that the product defect played a substantial role in bringing them about.
Theories of recovery in dangerous or defective product personal injury cases
The following are some possible legal theories that can be argued in a products liability case:
- Negligence – a lack of reasonable care in the manufacture or sale of a product or in warning about the product
- Breach of warranty – the failure to fulfill the terms of a promise regarding a product’s performance
- Misrepresentation – giving consumers a false sense of security about a product’s safety is a type of misrepresentation
- Strict liability – where a product’s defect, although not the fault of the defendant, rendered the product unreasonably dangerous, the defendant is responsible under the theory of strict liability
Although there is no limit to the list of products that could form the basis of a products liability suit, some of the more common product categories include apparel, asbestos, chemicals, cosmetics, firearms, food, machinery/tools, medical products and devices, motor vehicles, pharmaceutical products, recreational products and tobacco.
Contact a personal injury lawyer
Persons injured by dangerous or defective products need the counsel of skilled personal injury or products liability lawyers to advise them on the complexities of their case and guide them through the legal system toward the most favorable outcome. If you or someone you know has suffered injuries as a result of using a dangerous or defective product, an experienced and knowledgeable personal injury attorney at Peyton Law Firm, P.L.L.C. in Nitro, West Virginia, can advise you on whether you may have a claim against the product manufacturer or seller and can help you recover the maximum damages recoverable under the applicable laws.
DISCLAIMER: This site and any information contained herein are intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek competent legal counsel for advice on any legal matter.