Filing a product liability claim can be a complicated matter. Just because you think you have a case doesn’t necessarily mean that obtaining compensation will be easy, as defendants in these cases often use certain defenses to try and avoid liability. If you are considering filing a product liability claim, it is important to become familiar with the common defenses used by defendants so that you can be prepared for any potential arguments they may make.
If you are considering filing a product liability claim, contact Cameron Law for legal assistance. Our product liability lawyer can help you build a strong case and identify which defenses could be used against your claim so that you can plan your actions accordingly.
Common Defenses in Product Liability Claims
Product liability cases require complex legal strategies and arguments from both sides—which means understanding all potential defenses used by defendants can help plaintiffs prepare accordingly and increase their chances of success in court cases involving such claims.
Below are five of the most commonly used defenses in product liability cases.
1. Misuse
One of the most common defenses in product liability cases is misuse. This argument states that the plaintiff either intentionally or accidentally misused the product, which led to their injury or damages. For example, if a plaintiff was injured while using a power tool without proper safety equipment or instructions, then a defendant might argue that misuse was the cause of their injury.
2. Assumption of Risk
Under this defense, defendants will argue that the plaintiff assumed risk when using the product and should be held responsible for their own injury or damages. This applies when there were inherent risks associated with using the product but no negligence on behalf of the defendant. For example, if someone uses a knife without proper instruction and cuts themselves, then it could be argued that they assumed risk when using such an inherently dangerous item.
3. Alteration or Modification of the Product
Defendants may also argue that any injury or damages related to their product were caused by an alteration or modification made to it by someone else other than themselves or their employees. For instance, if someone purchased a car from another individual who had modified its engine without informing them about it first, then any subsequent damage caused by this modification could be attributed solely to this third-party individual rather than to the original manufacturer.
4. The Plaintiff Wasn’t an Intended User
In some cases, defendants may try to argue that any injury or damages incurred by the plaintiff were due to them not being an intended user of the product. This means that they should have known better than to use it in such a way as they did even though they were not provided with proper warnings or instructions beforehand. For instance, if a product is intended for adult use, but a child was injured while using the product, the defendant could argue that the child shouldn’t have been allowed to use the product in the first place.
5. The Statute of Limitations Has Expired
Lastly, some defendants may attempt to defend themselves against claims made after the statute of limitations has expired for such matters. Depending on where you live and what type of case you are filing, there are often strict time limits placed on how long after an incident occurs one can file suit against another party—and these time limits vary widely from state to state as well as from case type to case type.
In Nevada, the statute of limitations for most personal injury cases, including product liability claims, is two years from the date of the injury (Nevada Revised Statutes § 11.190).
