Product liability law is widely misunderstood. When the media reports cases where companies are sued for defective products, they tend to concentrate on the jury award amounts, which are sometimes quite high. The cases where it seems like the individual who was harmed should have known better also tend to get more play than the cases where someone was seriously injured. This tends to skew the public’s perception of these laws, but they’re very sensible, in all reality.
In a product liability claim, the party suing may claim that they were harmed in several different ways. They may claim that hazards inherent to the product were not clarified by the manufacturer. They may also claim that the manufacturing process used for the product was flawed and, as a result, they were harmed by a faulty product. They may also claim that the product, when used as intended, was inherently dangerous. As an example of how this influences consumer products, you’ll find printed warnings on most items that are dangerous when used correctly. Lawnmowers, for instance, have many warnings on them about the dangers of flying objects striking your eyes and of the dangers of coming too close to the blades.