Tyson & Mendes defends corporate clients in all types of product liability lawsuits, including negligent design, negligent manufacture, and failure to warn. We represent clients in product liability cases ranging from wrongful death and catastrophic injuries to subrogation claims. We have defended Fortune 500 companies in product liability cases involving manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of a wide array of machinery, medical devices, and other products. We leverage our experience and understanding of our clients’ business and products to prepare case- and product-specific litigation strategies to mitigate exposure to corporations whose products are challenged as unsafe.
Products Liability Litigation
Products Liability Litigation Articles:
Law360 - February 5, 2018 A California federal jury has found that Schwab Co. Inc. is not responsible for severe burns sustained by a child while wearing one of its shirts, clearing the clothing manufacturer of all liability after co-defendants Macy’s and Ralph Lauren settled for roughly $860,000. READ MORE HERE | DOWNLOAD ARTICLE
The Ford Motor Company (Ford) appealed a jury verdict in a strict liability design defect case, in which Ford unsuccessfully argued an alternative design defect test should have been included in the jury instructions. The plaintiff Teresa Gacia Trejo was driving a 2000 Ford Excursion on a highway with her husband Rafael Trejo sitting in the passenger seat. When Ms. Trejo attempted to change lanes, the trailer she was pulling fishtailed causing her to lose control of the vehicle. The Excursion rolled between 1.5 and 2.5 times before resting upside down. Ms. Trejo stated “the roof was so crushed that [she] was unable to see Rafael.” Ms. Trejo was able to climb out of the vehicle, but her husband died at the scene.
In William Jae Kim, et al. v. Toyota Motor Corporation, et al. (January 19, 2016) 243 Cal.App.4th 1366, a motorist brought action against automobile manufacturer for strict products liability.
Product liability cases can involve complex mechanisms of injury, and multiple design and manufacturing defendants. Recently, the Court of Appeal addressed a matter where defendants claimed a products liability case should have been tried under a risk/benefit test instead of a consumer expectations test.