Product Liability Reform: SB 2805 (1987).
Provides that a manufacturer or seller of a product is
Provides that a manufacturer or seller of a product is liable only if the plaintiff proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the product was not suitable or safe because it: (1) deviated from the design specifications or performance standards; (2) failed to contain adequate warnings; or (3) was designed in a defective manner. Provides that a manufacturer or seller is not liable if at the time the product left the manufacturer’s control there was not available a practical and feasible alternative design that would have prevented the harm. Provides that a product’s design is not defective if the harm results from an inherent characteristic of the product that is known to the ordinary person who uses or consumes it. Provides that a manufacturer or seller is not liable for a design defect if the harm results from an unavoidably unsafe aspect of a product and the product was accompanied by an adequate warning. Provides that the state of the art provision does not apply if the court makes all of the following determinations: (1) that the product is egregiously unsafe; (2) that the user could not be expected to have knowledge of the product’s risk; and (3) that the product has little or no usefulness. Provides that a manufacturer or seller in a warning‑defect case is not liable if an adequate warning is given. (An adequate warning is one that a reasonably prudent person in the similar circumstances would have provided.) Establishes a rebuttable presumption that a government (FDA) warning is adequate.
New Poll Finds Strong Bipartisan Support for Government Action vs. Litigation When it Comes to Handling the COVID-19 Pandemic
While COVID-19 relief efforts stall in Congress, public support for aid to small businesses and others impacted by the pandemic remains high. According to a new survey released today by […]
Missouri Supreme Court declines to review billion-dollar award against Johnson & Johnson baby powder
Juliette Fairley of the St. Louis Record reports on the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision not to review a $2 billion verdict.
ATRA President Tiger Joyce penned an op-ed for Law360 on the surge of COVID-19-related lawsuits targeting the insurance industry.
ATRA praises the passage of HB 6030 in Michigan, enacting COVID-19 liability protections.
ATRA’s statement on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania’s ruling in Hammons v. Ethicon to allow an out-of-state lawsuit to continue, openly defying SCOTUS precedent.