The desire expressed by an upset consumer to win a defective product liability case does not guarantee achievement of the desired outcome. Any potential plaintiff should understand what elements the potential plaintiff would need to prove, in order to win such a case.
Proof of an injury
Too often, some upset consumer has tried to submit a product liability case without proof of having sustained an injury. Sometimes consumers believe that the fact that an incident almost caused an injury could serve as the basis or a lawsuit.
In the eyes of the law, however, the plaintiff with a lawsuit against the maker of a defective product must have sustained an actual injury. No personal injury lawyer in Waterdown would agree to take a case, if the potential client had merely escaped possible harm.
Proof that the product was defective
Sometimes this can be the most difficult proof to produce. The victim has to determine how the defect got introduced into the unsatisfactory item. There are 3 different ways that any manufactured item that has been sold to consumers might have become defective.
Sometimes a designer’s idea seems great, but manages to introduce a defect. That defect could relate to some dangerous aspect of the design. Alternately, it might make the item sold to consumers weaker, slower, or undesirable in some other fashion.
It could be that the item’s defect reflects a mistake made during the manufacturing process. Maybe some worker on an assembly line failed to add some small part. Perhaps a part got added at the wrong spot. There are many ways for a defect to get introduced during the manufacturing process.
Finally, it is also possible that the marketer made a mistake. Perhaps a needed warning had not been added to the product’s label. Maybe the instructions had not been clear, allowing the user to get insured while trying to follow the confusing instructions.
Proof that the defect caused the injury
A medical doctor should be able to confirm the connection between the defect and the injury. Yet a doctor’s statement might not guarantee a win, if the opposing side were to introduce a medical expert with a view that refuted the doctor’s statement.
Evidence from the injured plaintiff that he or she had been using the product in the way that consumers were supposed to use it.
Consumers do have some latitude, with respect to how any item must be used. Still, any consumer’s effort at utilizing some item should demonstrate an element of reason. An unreasonable type of usage would not be acceptable in the eyes of the law. Doctors do have some leeway, in terms of prescribing drugs. Still, each doctor must follow the FDA’s guidance.