{"id":1137,"date":"2016-09-23T06:39:22","date_gmt":"2016-09-23T11:39:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.masstortlawyerblog.com\/?p=1137"},"modified":"2018-04-12T12:38:12","modified_gmt":"2018-04-12T17:38:12","slug":"alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/","title":{"rendered":"Alabama Supreme Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendants in Wrongful Death Smoke Detector Product Liability Action"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the recent case of\u00a0Hosford v. BRK Brands, Inc.<\/a><\/em>, the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama\u00a0considered whether a smoke detector manufacturer could be held liable for the death of the plaintiffs’ daughter, resulting from a fire in the family’s mobile home. The defendant in the lawsuit manufactured two smoke alarms that had been installed in the family’s mobile home prior to when the fire took place. In their complaint, the plaintiffs alleged that the manufacturer designed the smoke alarms in a defective manner and failed to provide sufficient warnings about the dangers associated with the fire alarms.<\/p>\n

During the litigation, the plaintiffs conceded that one of the smoke detectors made an alerting sound at the time the fire began. However, they contended that the alarm did not sound soon enough to ensure that the occupants could exit the mobile home safely, which would have required rescuing their daughter before exiting.<\/p>\n

The plaintiffs’ complaint included numerous causes of action against the defendant, including a breach of warranty claim, a failure to warn claim, and a negligence claim. They also asserted a product liability claim, which imposes a strict liability standard on the defendant. At the close of trial, the trial court judge concluded that the plaintiffs had only provided enough evidence to support their product liability claim.\u00a0The jury deliberated and returned a verdict in the defendants’ favor. The plaintiffs appealed.<\/p>\n

Continue reading \u2192<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the recent case of\u00a0Hosford v. BRK Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama\u00a0considered whether a smoke detector manufacturer could be held liable for the death of the plaintiffs’ daughter, resulting from a fire in the family’s mobile home. The defendant in the lawsuit manufactured two smoke alarms that had been installed […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1137","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-product-liability"],"yoast_head":"\nAlabama Supreme Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendants in Wrongful Death Smoke Detector Product Liability Action — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — September 23, 2016<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In the recent case of\u00a0Hosford v. BRK Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama\u00a0considered whether a smoke detector manufacturer could be — September 23, 2016\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Alabama Supreme Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendants in Wrongful Death Smoke Detector Product Liability Action — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — September 23, 2016\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"In the recent case of\u00a0Hosford v. BRK Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama\u00a0considered whether a smoke detector manufacturer could be — September 23, 2016\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Moll Law Group\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Alabama Supreme Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendants in Wrongful Death Smoke Detector Product Liability Action — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — September 23, 2016","description":"In the recent case of\u00a0Hosford v. BRK Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama\u00a0considered whether a smoke detector manufacturer could be — September 23, 2016","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Alabama Supreme Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendants in Wrongful Death Smoke Detector Product Liability Action — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — September 23, 2016","twitter_description":"In the recent case of\u00a0Hosford v. BRK Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama\u00a0considered whether a smoke detector manufacturer could be — September 23, 2016","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Moll Law Group","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/"},"author":{"name":"Moll Law Group","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/53d2eb37d5d0cdb46ac61abacf05ce90"},"headline":"Alabama Supreme Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendants in Wrongful Death Smoke Detector Product Liability Action","datePublished":"2016-09-23T11:39:22+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-12T17:38:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/"},"wordCount":558,"articleSection":["Product Liability"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/","url":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/","name":"Alabama Supreme Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendants in Wrongful Death Smoke Detector Product Liability Action — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — September 23, 2016","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2016-09-23T11:39:22+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-12T17:38:12+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/53d2eb37d5d0cdb46ac61abacf05ce90"},"description":"In the recent case of\u00a0Hosford v. BRK Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama\u00a0considered whether a smoke detector manufacturer could be — September 23, 2016","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/alabama-supreme-court-upholds-summary-judgment-defendants-wrongful-death-smoke-detector-product-liability-action\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Alabama Supreme Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendants in Wrongful Death Smoke Detector Product Liability Action"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/","name":"Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog","description":"Published by Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Attorney \u2014 Moll Law Group","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/53d2eb37d5d0cdb46ac61abacf05ce90","name":"Moll Law Group","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0febdc96ea554e620e775358f9d7e4fc56616188dfd2bb21b18c2fed4bd185a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0febdc96ea554e620e775358f9d7e4fc56616188dfd2bb21b18c2fed4bd185a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0febdc96ea554e620e775358f9d7e4fc56616188dfd2bb21b18c2fed4bd185a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Moll Law Group"}}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1137","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1137"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1137\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1591,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1137\/revisions\/1591"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1137"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1137"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1137"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}