Products Liability

Tyson & Mendes defends corporate clients in all types of products liability lawsuits, including negligent design, negligent manufacture, and failure to warn. We represent clients in products liability cases ranging from wrongful death and catastrophic injuries to subrogation claims. We have defended Fortune 500 companies such as Costco, State Farm, Liberty Mutual, Nationwide, USAA, CBRE, American Family, Sprouts Farmers Market, and many others in products 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’ businesses and products to prepare case- and product-specific litigation strategies to mitigate exposure to corporations whose products are challenged as unsafe.

Wyoming Jury Rules in Favor of Omni Group in Products Liability Case: Tyson & Mendes Wins Major Defense Verdict in High Stakes Lawsuit

June 21, 2022 3:56pm

Cheyenne, Wyoming (June 21, 2022) – Marking a victory for national civil litigation defense firm Tyson & Mendes LLP in a high-profile products liability lawsuit, a Wyoming jury has returned a verdict in favor of Virginia-based Omni Group, a product manufacturer.

A $10M Defense Win in a Tragic Case

February 7, 2018 2:18pm

Litigation Daily - February 7, 2018 It’s hard to truly revel in winning at trial when your opponent is a horribly burned child.

Jury Says Shirt Co. Not Liable In $10M Suit Over Child’s Burns

February 6, 2018 12:32pm

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.

Washington Appeals Court Holding Might Save The Raspberries

Author: Shivani Bommakanty | September 30, 2022 9:00am

A recent Washington case called into question FIFRA and preemption of state express warranty claims. On appeal, the court held state express warranty claims are not preempted by FIFRA. The decision cited a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Bates v. Dow Agrisciences...

Who Do Drug Manufacturers Need to Warn? Washington Supreme Court Weighs In

Author: Shivani Bommakanty | July 12, 2022 12:54pm

The Washington Supreme Court recently held[1] the duty to warn requirements under the Washington Product Liability Act[2] (“WPLA”) are satisfied when drug manufacturers provide adequate warnings about the risks and side effects of a given drug...

Causation Instructions Cause Trouble

Author: Jennifer Merringer Veal, Bertha Baranko Fitzer | June 7, 2022 9:30am

Significant costs are invested to obtain a defense verdict. Experienced trial lawyers realize it is equally important to avoid inviting error which will result in a costly retrial...

Nevada Affirms Use Of Consumer-Expectation Test In Design Defect Cases

Author: Christopher Lund | November 5, 2017 10:52am

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.

Products Liability

Products Liability

Open Roles