Defective Product Liability Claim Types

Learn about the three categories of product liability claims: manufacturing error, unsafe product design, and failure to offer proper notice.

If you were harmed or incurred other losses as a result of a product you used, you may be able to file a faulty product liability claim. Though the breadth of faulty product instances is extensive, product liability lawsuits often fall into three categories: (1) faulty manufacturing; (2) faulty design; or (3) failing to give suitable warnings or instructions on proper product usage.

Understanding these categories can assist you in determining if you have a solid claim and how to present your case.

When it comes to the fundamental forms of faulty product claims, each state has roughly the same basic regulations, which are outlined here. Keep in mind that you must demonstrate not just that the product was faulty, but also that the flaw caused your harm.

Products with Defective Manufacturing

The most apparent sort of product liability claim is when the product that caused the damage was defectively created. A defectively created product is faulty due to a manufacturing mistake, such as an issue at the plant where it was made. As a consequence, the injury-causing product is distinct from the others on the shelf.

Manufacturing flaws include the following:

a swing set with a broken chain, a poisoned batch of cough medicine containing a hazardous chemical, or a scooter without brake pads.

The damage must have been caused by the manufacturing flaw in each instance. So, if you miscalculated a curve, drove off the road, and hurt yourself while riding on the moped with the missing brake pads indicated above, you would only have a manufacturing defect claim if you could demonstrate that the missing brake pads caused your accident, not your bad steering.

Defective Product Design

The design of a product is inherently harmful or faulty under the second kind of product liability category. Defective design claims do not emerge from a manufacturing mistake or incident, but rather from the assertion that a whole range of goods is inherently harmful, regardless of whether the injury-causing device was flawlessly manufactured according to the manufacturer’s standards.

Examples of design flaws include:

a certain brand of automobile that has a tendency to flip over when rounding a corner, a style of eyewear that fails to shield the eyes from UV radiation, or a line of electric blankets that may electrocute the user when put on high.

Again, the harm must have been caused by a faulty design. If you smash into another vehicle while driving one of the above-mentioned flip-prone vehicles, you would only have a design defect claim if you could demonstrate that you collided because the car was in the process of flipping over while turning.

Failure to Issue Appropriate Warnings or Instructions

The third form of product liability claim concerns a failure to offer appropriate warnings or instructions about the correct use of the product. Failure-to-warn claims often include a product that is harmful in some manner that is not clear to the user or needs the user to take additional measures or exercise exceptional care while using it.

A failure-to-warn claim could include:

a cough syrup that does not include on its label a warning that it may cause dangerous side effects if taken in combination with another commonly taken drug such as aspirin, or a corrosive paint-removing chemical that is sold without adequate instructions for safe handling and use.

Again, the damage must be the consequence of a failure to warn or adequately teach. If you are burnt while using the above-mentioned newfangled tea kettle, you will only have a failure-to-warn claim if the steam suddenly comes out of the awkwardly positioned steam valve.

Considering the Three Kinds of Product Liability Claims

Pharmaceutical medication claims may be used to compare the three forms of product liability claims. Your claim would be based on a manufacturing fault if you were harmed because the specific bottle of cough syrup you purchased included several drops of arsenic that dropped into it by mistake at the plant where it was created.

In contrast, if ingesting the same type of unadulterated cough syrup caused you to have a heart attack due to its natural constituents, your claim would be based on a design flaw.

Finally, if the cough syrup was properly prepared and is usually safe for use, but you were harmed because you mixed it with aspirin and the label failed to warn you that such a combination is risky, your claim would be based on a failure to warn.

Understanding these distinctions can help you identify your product liability claim and present your case effectively in court.