We are happy to announce that we're celebrating 30 years! →

San Diego Products Liability

Product Liability

Product Liability Lawyers Serving San Diego Residents

As a consumer, you expect that your prescriptions, your car, your appliances, and the products you use for your child are all safe for use, particularly if there are no warnings otherwise. However, in some cases, these items are unreasonably dangerous and can cause catastrophic injuries or even death to San Diego residents. The product liability attorneys at Moll Law Group are available to bring lawsuits on behalf of injured consumers against manufacturers and sellers of defective products. In many cases, a lawsuit is the only way to secure justice and compensation after suffering injuries. Moreover, in some cases, product liability actions help to make life safer for other consumers. Billions of dollars have been recovered in cases in which we have been involved.

Holding a Manufacturer Accountable for Damages in California

California is considered a leader in consumer safety and product liability law. A plaintiff trying to recover damages for injuries caused by defective products may make claims under three different theories, each of them an alternative to the others: strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. In some cases, it is also appropriate to sue for fraud.

Usually, strict liability is the most straightforward theory under which an injured plaintiff can pursue a claim for damages. A manufacturer or another entity in the stream of commerce may be held strictly liable for putting a product on the market if it knows that the product will be used without inspecting for defects, the product does have a defect, and the defect injures someone. The rationale behind strict liability is that the costs of any injuries suffered should be borne by the manufacturer that put the product on the market, rather than an injured victim who had no way of knowing about the defect.

The defects that can give rise to strict liability are design defects, manufacturing defects, and marketing defects. There are two ways to establish design defects: the consumer expectation test and the risk-utility test. With the former, you need to show the product did not perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when it was used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable way. This test is only used in cases in which the average user's experience allows for a conclusion that there was a safety problem in the design, and this experience is within the common knowledge that a jury can be expected to have. It does not require an expert opinion.

The risk-utility test requires expert analysis and testimony. The plaintiff needs to show that the defendant manufactured, distributed, or sold the product, the product's design was a substantial factor in harming the plaintiff, and the defendant cannot show that the benefits of the design outweighed its risks. Factors that may be relevant to the risk-utility analysis include the seriousness of the potential harm resulting from using the product, the likelihood of that harm, the feasibility of an alternative safer design at the time the product was manufactured, the cost of the alternative design, and any disadvantages to using the alternative design.

Contact a Product Liability Attorney for a Claim in San Diego

If you or a loved one has been hurt by a defective item in San Diego, the product liability lawyers at Moll Law Group are available to help you assert your right to compensation. Depending on the situation, you may be able to receive damages for medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering, among other items. Call our injury attorneys at 312-462-1700 or use our online form to set up a free consultation.

Client Reviews

"He’s not afraid to take on the big companies. He has sued Ford, he has sued Merck, Bridgestone, Firestone… He’s fearless. He’s relentless." Deane Brown
"He was able to richly bless us with some medical reimbursements for losing Hope that we didn’t expect. It didn’t replace Hope, it never will replace. But it just gave us a lot of blessing." Melanie Moul
"He was there not to do something for himself, he was there to help me with my problem. And that’s what he did, he took care of it." Anne Levy
"Ken is unique among attorneys that I've worked with because as he pursues cases, he's always focused on the individuals, strategizing ways to best serve the needs of the client. He's a lawyer for people." John Galarnyk
"He’s very kind, and he’s just someone that you can really count on. Always." Michael McStraw