New Hampshire and Massachusetts Products Liability Lawyers

Our New Hampshire and Massachusetts products liability lawyers explain that defective products cases, or products liability cases, are sophisticated cases. To that point, they involve manufacturers, distributors, and suppliers of products that cause injuries to the consumer. Under the Second Restatement of Torts, there are three primary types of products liability cases. Manufacturing defects, design defects, and failure to warn. Generally speaking, these tend to be strict liability cases.

Manufacturing Defect:

A product made defectively is a manufacturing defect. Our New Hampshire and Massachusetts products liability lawyers recently handled a defective miter case. It happened to be, that the case was in New Hampshire Federal Court. The Chinese made the saw cheaply. There was a manufacturing defect. An internal spring was wound too tight. Notably, the blade guard jammed when the saw head was lowered. This made the table assembly flip over. The blade to severely lacerated our client’s forearm.

Design Defect:

A design defect is a product that was defectively designed at its inception. Consequently, our products liability lawyers also identified a design defect in our miter saw case. In particular, a simple rubber bumper guard should’ve been installed. Despite the defective spring, his would’ve prevented the blade guard from jamming.

Notably, this products liability case was very complex. Fortunately, our products liability lawyers came into possession of the defective miter saw. They had it shipped to a forensic evidence storage facility for examination. Home – FERASCO The examination consisted of a microscopic analysis, x-ray analysis, and calibrated force measurement gauge testing. Our engineering expert re-created the entire mechanism of the incident using a table assembly that he created. We videotape the entire examination. Under these circumstances, we keep a chain of custody to ensure the product is not altered. Thereafter, the saw is available for the opposing expert to examine.

Failure to Warn:

Finally, a failure to warn involves a inherently dangerous product that is not apparent to the user. In essence, a failure to warn typically comes up in pharmaceutical cases. The medication the lacks a proper warning label. Suppose a medication is dangerous to a fetus but did not have a warning. That would be a viable claim.

Theories of Products Liability:

In summary, there are several different theories of liability in defective products cases according to our products liability lawyers. These include strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. Simultaneously, a defense to strict liability is product misuse. As an illustration, they argued that the customer misused the saw in our case. Evidently, he created his own table assembly using two rubber made trash barrels and a plywood tabletop.

It stands to reason, that usually these cases are litigated in Federal Court. Products liability lawyers use the Diversity of Citizenship jurisdictional rule. If all parties reside in a different state and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, the case can be brought in Federal Court. 28 U.S. Code § 1332 – Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)

https://www.granite-law-group.com/blog/hazardous-to-infants-nap-nanny-recliners-recalled-by-cpsc/