Sentences with phrase «products liability theory»

Claims against NECC may rely on a strict products liability theory, alleging that the contaminated drugs contained a manufacturing defect.

A manufacturer can be held liable under a products liability theory for any of the following actions / inactions: negligently designing the product, negligently manufacturing the product, failing to warn of the products dangers, breaching a warranty or misrepresenting (either fraudulently or innocently) the product.

A: There is a possibility of combining social - based or emotionally based torts with more traditional product liability theory — something that creators might want to keep an eye on.

If a product that is designed, sold, manufactured, or distributed by a company is unsafe, a person injured by such product can bring a damages lawsuit against the manufacturer under a product liability theory.

Not exact matches

While the landscape is somewhat in flux with respect to the specific theories of liability that can be invoked to pursue claims regarding manufacturing defects, design defects, and failure to warn, all three remain central to products liability law.

There are several theories of liability in product liability cases.

There are several theories regarding recovery under product liability including contract theories and tort theories.

She understands that the key to handling most product liability cases is a detailed understanding of the product's design and utility, and because of her experience and attention to detail, she is at home dealing with complex engineering concepts, picking apart experts» theories and defending her clients» products.

Possible legal theories that can be argued in a products liability case include negligence (lack of reasonable care in the manufacture or sale of the product or in warning about the product), breach of warranty (failure to fulfill the terms of a promise regarding the product's performance), misrepresentation (giving consumers a false sense of security about a product's safety), and strict liability (under which the product's defect, although not the fault of the defendant, rendered the product unreasonably dangerous and the defendant is therefore responsible).

If these accidents are caused by the vehicles, it is possible that the families of people who are killed may be able to hold the companies liable under theories of negligence and strict products liability.

(And one of the product liability jury wins still required Merck to pay a plaintiff $ 15 plus attorneys» fees on a consumer fraud theory.)

Product liability is a strict liability theory that does not require proof of negligent conduct but relates directly to product Product liability is a strict liability theory that does not require proof of negligent conduct but relates directly to product product defect.

This theory addresses what a manufacturer's liability is for older versions of its products, when there have been more recent developments in safety.

The ruling upheld the dismissal of design defect claims in a suit alleging that certain manufacturers are liable under theories of strict (product) liability and negligence.

Specifically, a party injured as a result of a defective medical product may seek damages against the manufacturer based on theories of a breach of a promise, express or implied, negligence, or strict product liability, including a failure to warn users of dangers.

Unlike most medical negligence claims in New York, claims against a medical product manufacturer require the establishment of a different theory of liability.

The laws related to the various theories of product liability can be incredibly complex.

Products liability cases use one of three legal theories: negligence, strict liability, or breach of warranty.

There are various legal theories which can be used to support a product liability lawsuit.

Common legal theories under which asbestos victims may recover compensation include product liability, workers» compensation, and premises liability.

735 ILCS 5/13-213 (c): Alteration, modification or change No product liability action based on any theory or doctrine to recover for injury or damage claimed to have resulted from an alteration, modification, or change of the product unit after the date of first sale, lease, or delivery of possession of the product unit to its initial user, consumer, or other nonseller may be limited or barred by subsection (b) if the action is commenced within the applicable limitation period; and, in any event, within 10 years from the date the alteration, modification, or change was made, unless defendant expressly has warranted or promised the product for a longer period and the action is brought within that period.

Product liability in vehicle crashes can be difficult to establish, but is nonetheless an important legal theory to explore following a collision.

Strict Liability: In general, products liability cases are pursued under the theory of strict lLiability: In general, products liability cases are pursued under the theory of strict lliability cases are pursued under the theory of strict liabilityliability.

There are three main theories to support liability for defective products.

In theory, we don't yet have strict products liability like in the U.S. Would you exclude that, if we ever get there?

In chemical poisoning cases, product - liability actions are often brought under failure to warn or defective packaging theories.

We know how to evaluate and investigate recreational injuries under legal theories of premises liability, negligent supervision, product liability or other causes.

There are three main legal theories of defective product liability:

If you have been injured using a consumer product, the seller of the product may be responsible under a «strict liability» legal theory.

It is a guide to all the issues and all the possibilities that can come up in environmental, toxic tort, and product liability litigation — whether related to PowerPoint, scientific expert witnesses, competing scientific theories, body language, or any of a myriad of questions that can come up in this complex field.

Product liability cases can be brought under several legal theories, with the most common one being negligence.

The primary occasion when the courts have rejected a plaintiff's effort to seek application of the doctrine of strict product liability, on the ground that there is no product, has been when he or she has tried to apply the theory to defective services, rather than defective goods.

Act 2, including: changes to Wisconsin's product liability laws; adding Daubert standards for cases tried in Wisconsin involving expert opinion and evidence; eliminating the controversial «risk contribution» theory created by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in the 2005 Thomas v. Mallett decision; placing caps on punitive damages; and reducing frivolous lawsuits by holding parties liable for costs and fees for filing frivolous claims.

While a product liability lawsuit is also a possible course of action, most cases will be brought under the theory of negligence.

The court explained that the state where the accident arose does not use a strict liability theory for product liability cases, so a plaintiff must proceed under an implied warranty or negligence theory.

It is not uncommon for plaintiffs to pursue theories of negligence and products liability in their lawsuits.

Following Brooks v. Beech Aircraft Corp., New Mexico product liability claims can be brought using a strict liability theory.

The economic loss doctrine bars a plaintiff from recovering certain money damages under a tort theory (e.g. negligence, products liability, property damage, etc.) where a contract defines his relationship with a defendant.

There may be multiple theories of liability in these lawsuits, including strict product liability, negligence, marketing defect, failure to warn, manufacturing defect, design defect, or breach of warranty.

We have represented our insurance clients as lead counsel in a variety of litigation and dispute resolution matters including: Life and Annuity Sales Practices Including class action and individual cases alleging misleading and deceptive sales practices and breaches of duty pursuant to a variety of theories of liability related to life, annuity, and retirement products.

In some states, a company or person who designs, manufactures, inspects, distributes, or installs an item can be held responsible for a defective product under the theory of strict liability.

The laws in each state are different, but in general, there are four theories that drive most product liability cases: Negligence, Breach of Warranty, Misrepresentation and Strict Lliability cases: Negligence, Breach of Warranty, Misrepresentation and Strict LiabilityLiability.

Ohio Supreme Court Rejects Cumulative - Exposure Theory for Asbestos Claims - Product Liability Update

The Drug and Medical Device Product Liability Deskbook includes: detailed coverage of: warning - related claims and defenses; other information - based theories; strict liability; FDA - related per se liability; preemption of common law tort claims by the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act and FDA regulations; class actions in drug and medical device litigation; theories of liability asserted against entities other than manufacturers; practical issues involving litigation management; the use of expert witnesses; and many other importanLiability Deskbook includes: detailed coverage of: warning - related claims and defenses; other information - based theories; strict liability; FDA - related per se liability; preemption of common law tort claims by the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act and FDA regulations; class actions in drug and medical device litigation; theories of liability asserted against entities other than manufacturers; practical issues involving litigation management; the use of expert witnesses; and many other importanliability; FDA - related per se liability; preemption of common law tort claims by the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act and FDA regulations; class actions in drug and medical device litigation; theories of liability asserted against entities other than manufacturers; practical issues involving litigation management; the use of expert witnesses; and many other importanliability; preemption of common law tort claims by the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act and FDA regulations; class actions in drug and medical device litigation; theories of liability asserted against entities other than manufacturers; practical issues involving litigation management; the use of expert witnesses; and many other importanliability asserted against entities other than manufacturers; practical issues involving litigation management; the use of expert witnesses; and many other important topics.

Most deck, porch, and railing collapse cases involve legal theories of negligence, premises liability, product liability, and construction law.

• Administrative Law • Antitrust & Regulated Industries • Asian Law • Bankruptcy, Reorganization, & Creditors» Rights • Canadian Law • Comparative Law • Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy Journals • Contracts & Commercial Law • Corporate, Securities & Finance Law Journals • Criminal Law & Procedure • Cyberspace Law • Discrimination, Law & Justice • Employment, Labor, Compensation & Pension Journals • English & Commonwealth Law • Environmental Law & Policy • European Law Journals • Evidence & Evidentiary Procedure • Experimental & Empirical Studies • Family & Children's Law • Health Law Journals • Housing & Community Development Law • Forensic Economics • Immigration, Refugee & Citizenship Law • India Law • Indigenous Nations & Peoples Law • Insurance Law, Legislation, & Policy • Intellectual Property Law • International Law & Trade • LSN Educator: Courses, Materials & Teaching • Law & Economics • Law & Humanities • Law & Humanities / Legal History (Archive) • Law & Positive Political Theory • Law & Society • Law, Institutions & Development • Law, Norms & Informal Order • Legal Education • Legal Ethics & Professional Responsibility • Legal History • Legislation & Statutory Interpretation • Litigation, Procedure & Dispute Resolution Journals • National Security & Foreign Relations Law • Nonprofit & Philanthropy Law • Property, Citizenship, & Social Entrepreneurism • Property, Land Use & Real Estate Law • Regulation of Financial Institutions • Tax Law & Policy Journals • Torts & Products Liability Law • Wills, Trusts, & Estates Law • Women, Gender & the Law • Young Scholars Law

Product Liability analyzes both the theory and practice of products liability litigation, whether the issue is asbestos, automobiles, food, drugs, chemicals, household products, or any of the hundreds of other products that may be the subject of liLiability analyzes both the theory and practice of products liability litigation, whether the issue is asbestos, automobiles, food, drugs, chemicals, household products, or any of the hundreds of other products that may be the subject of liliability litigation, whether the issue is asbestos, automobiles, food, drugs, chemicals, household products, or any of the hundreds of other products that may be the subject of litigation.

Attorneys for both plaintiffs and defendants will find comprehensive coverage of such matters as: the advantages and disadvantages of suits based on strict liability, negligence and breach of warranty; the use of state consumer protection statutes; the duty to warn and its innumerable ramifications; the liability of the manufacturers, retailers and other potential defendants in the distribution chain; successor liability; federal preemption of common law claims; monitoring product safety during design, manufacturing and distribution; causation theories in actions involving multiple manufacturers; product misuse and alteration; the elements of proof needed in an action; recovery for economic loss; punitive damages; and the government contractor defense.

In no event shall Policybazaar and / or its affiliates be liable for any direct, indirect, punitive, incidental, special, or consequential damages arising out of, or in any way connected with, your access to, display of or use of this site or with the delay or inability to access, display or use this site (including, but not limited to, your reliance upon opinions appearing on this site; any computer viruses, information, software, linked sites, products, and services obtained through this site; or otherwise arising out of the access to, display of or use of this site) whether based on a theory of negligence, contract, tort, strict liability, or otherwise, and even if Policybazaar and / or its affiliates their respective service providers have been advised of the possibility of such damages.

In no event shall the aggregate liability of Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate LLC, whether in contract, warranty, tort (including negligence, whether active, passive or imputed), product liability, strict liability or other theory, arising out of or relating to the use of or inability to use the Web Site exceed any compensation you pay, if any, to Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate LLC for access to, or use of the Web Site.