Product injury cases can be very tricky and complex. They arise when someone is using a product exactly as it was intended and the product malfunctions in some way, causing serious injury and harm.
There are many different approaches that can be taken to this kind of case, and it can be tricky for many people to know how to proceed when seeking compensation for the injuries they’ve suffered. Learn about product liability claims, how different and multiple legal theories can come into play, and why having the services of an injury lawyer is vital.
Theories of Product Liability
When pursuing a product liability claim, it’s important to take the right approach. For many people, this alone can be confusing as there are a number of different paths or legal theories that can play into this kind of case. In fact, it’s not uncommon for a given lawsuit to use multiple legal theories.
These theories can include the idea of strict liability, which is the most common approach. They can involve negligence (but don’t have to, which sets them apart from other injury cases). They could concern a breach of warranty or even fraud if the product was somehow misrepresented.
The Strict Liability Approach
The most common approach to a product injury case is strict liability. This is common because it’s straightforward and operates on a few basic and legally sound assumptions. These are that the defendant had a responsibility to provide a safe and working product, that the product provided was unreasonably dangerous or didn’t have proper warnings, and that the seller had no intention of repairing the issue before it came to market. If you’re hurt by a product due to these factors, you’ve got strict liability.
Negligence is the core of most injury cases but doesn’t always attach to product liability. Negligence means that the defendant had a duty to produce a product that was not dangerous if used properly, that they failed to uphold this duty and that this specific failure caused the injuries in question. It’s similar to strict liability but puts a bit more of the burden of proof on the plaintiff.
If you can show that there was some sort of guarantee or warranty attached to the product, either explicit or implied and that the product didn’t live up to that warranty, you may be able to sue for breach of warranty. Such cases are comparatively rare compared to the above.
A fraud case hinges on the core idea that the manufacturer misrepresented the product in some way and that this deliberate misrepresentation caused your injury. If you can show you had no reason to doubt the way the product was represented and that the representation was done explicitly to mislead you into buying, you may be able to open the door to additional, punitive damages.
Hiring an Injury Lawyer
Any of these cases and theories places a certain burden of proof on your part, and it can be tough to know which one to use. That’s why you should call a personal injury lawyer like those at the law offices of Robert White. Give us a call and let’s talk about your case today at no cost to you.