How to Prove a Product Liability Case

Understanding the complexities of a product liability case is crucial for anyone seeking justice for personal injuries caused by faulty products. 

The legal process can often be labyrinthine, and proving fault is paramount to success. This post provides an overview of how to navigate this intricate field of law and highlights the indispensable role that a competent lawyer plays in such cases. 

Let our Philadelphia product liability lawyer at Baratta Law LLC help you. 

What Are the Elements of a Product Liability Claim?

Product liability claims are based on the premise that companies must produce and sell safe products to consumers. 

When they fail in this duty, and consumers get hurt, those consumers may have legal recourse. 

To succeed in a product liability claim, a plaintiff typically must establish the following elements:

Defective Product

To establish a claim, you must demonstrate that the product in question, which caused your injuries or other damages, is flawed. 

The defect might arise from the following:

  • A manufacturing mistake
  • An inherent design flaw
  • An absence of sufficient warning about potential risks

If you can show the product has a hidden danger that an average consumer wouldn’t recognize, you can argue that its design is flawed. The adequacy of the provided warnings and instructions will be crucial in determining liability.

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) sets guidelines for product safety labels and warnings. Per ANSI’s standards, a safety label should mention:

  • Present hazards
  • The extent of the risk associated with the product’s use
  • The consequences of the hazard
  • Measures to mitigate the risk.

Here are three primary types of product defects:

  1. Design Defects

These are inherent flaws in the design of the product. Even if manufactured perfectly, the product is unsafe because of its design.

  1. Manufacturing Defects

These flaws occur during the production or assembly of the product. The design might be safe, but something went wrong in the manufacturing process.

  1. Marketing Defects (or Failure to Warn)

These defects involve inadequate instructions or failures to provide warnings about potential risks.

The product Was Used as Intended

The plaintiff was using the product in a way intended to be used or in a way that the manufacturer should reasonably expect a consumer to use it.

Injury or Loss

The plaintiff must prove they suffered actual harm or injury. This can be physical, emotional, or financial.


There must be a direct link between the product’s defect and the injury. In other words, the damage must have been caused by the weakness in the product.

Product Was Not Altered

SMS The product hasn’t been substantially changed from the condition in which it was sold. Alterations or modifications that affect the product’s performance or safety and contribute to the injury might weaken or nullify a claim.

Duty and Breach

The defendant (usually the manufacturer or seller) had a duty to provide a safe product. By producing or selling a defective product, they breached this duty.

Each jurisdiction might have nuances or specific requirements related to product liability claims. Therefore, anyone considering such a claim should consult with legal professionals familiar with the particular jurisdiction’s laws and requirements.

Types of Product Defect Claims

When consumers purchase a product, they trust its safety and efficacy. However, sometimes, that trust is betrayed when a product causes harm or doesn’t perform as promised. 

When such unfortunate incidents occur, consumers may seek legal recourse through product defect claims. 

 1. Design Defects

Design defects are flaws intrinsic to the product’s design, implying that even if the product is manufactured perfectly, its design is inherently unsafe. Such defects arise before the product is even made.


  • A car model with a design that makes it prone to tipping over on sharp turns.
  • A blender is designed without a safety mechanism to prevent operation when the lid is off.

Legal Implication

To prove a design defect, plaintiffs often need to demonstrate that there was a safer, feasible alternative design that the manufacturer could have used and that this alternative would not have significantly increased the cost or reduced the product’s effectiveness.

2. Manufacturing Defects

Manufacturing defects occur during the assembly or production process. Here, the design might be inherently safe, but due to issues in the manufacturing process, specific units end up being unsafe.


  • A batch of medicines got contaminated during production.
  • A toy is intended to be made with non-toxic paint, but a mistake in the manufacturing facility results in toxic paint being used.

Legal Implication

To succeed in a manufacturing defect claim, plaintiffs usually need to show that the product deviated from its intended design and that this deviation caused it to be unreasonably dangerous.

 3. Marketing (or Information) Defects

Also referred to as “failure to warn” or “labeling defects,” these defects involve inadequate instructions, misleading marketing, or failures to provide warnings about potential risks associated with the product.


  • A chemical product sold without instructions for safe handling or storage.
  • A hairdryer not labeled with a warning against use near water.

Legal Implication

The challenge here often lies in proving that the manufacturer knew or should have known about the potential hazard, that they failed to warn users adequately, and that this failure resulted in harm.

 4. Warranty Breaches

While not a “defect” in the traditional sense, breaches of warranty can also give rise to product claims. Warranties are essentially promises made by manufacturers or sellers regarding the quality, safety, or functionality of a product.


  • A promise that a product will last a certain number of years, but it breaks down much sooner.
  • A guarantee that a product is suitable for a specific purpose, but it fails to perform as promised.

Legal Implication

Claims based on warranty breaches usually focus on whether the promise or guarantee was breached and whether this breach led to damages.

Understanding the different types of product defect claims is crucial for both consumers and legal practitioners. While the specifics of laws and regulations might vary depending on jurisdictions, these categories serve as a foundational guide. 

For anyone who believes they’ve been harmed due to a defective product, it’s essential to consult with legal professionals familiar with product liability laws in their jurisdiction. 

This will ensure that they can effectively navigate the complexities of the legal landscape and seek the justice they deserve.

Who is Responsible for Defective Products?

In a product liability case, several parties can be held responsible. Typically, it’s not just one entity but a chain involved in getting the product from the factory to your doorstep.

  • Manufacturers: Manufacturers are responsible for creating the product. If there are errors during production that result in defects causing harm, they can be held accountable.
  • Distributors: They’re the middlemen between manufacturers and retailers. If they mishandle products or fail to check for defects before passing them on, they could be at fault.
  • Retailers: The final link in the chain. Retailers sell products directly to consumers. If they knowingly sell defective items or fail to provide adequate warnings about potential risks, they, too, can face legal action.

Supply Chain Process and Liability

The supply chain process plays a pivotal role in determining liability. It’s like a relay race where each participant has a responsibility not to drop the baton (the product).

For instance:

  • A manufacturer might use substandard materials, leading to an inherently dangerous product.
  • A distributor might store products under inappropriate conditions, causing damage.
  • A retailer might ignore safety recalls from manufacturers and continue selling harmful goods.

Each party must ensure that their part of this relay doesn’t contribute towards making a consumer’s life miserable with faulty goods.

Joint Liability Concept

Sometimes, multiple parties are found guilty of contributing to producing defective goods; this is known as joint liability.

For example:

  • Suppose a manufacturer and retailer knew about potential hazards associated with their product, but neither took steps to rectify it or warn customers. In such cases, both parties could be held jointly liable for any harm caused by their negligence.

Legal Implications for Companies

Companies found responsible for defective products face severe legal implications. These can range from hefty fines and penalties to, in extreme cases, even business closures.

Moreover, the reputation damage of being held accountable for harmful products can be devastating. It’s not just about paying money but also losing consumer trust, which is far more valuable and challenging to regain.

To illustrate this point:

These examples serve as stark reminders of the potential fallout when companies fail in their duty to ensure product safety. 

Statutes of Limitations in Pennsylvania

In Pennsylvania, an action must be brought within two years of the date on which the injury occurred.

It’s crucial to be aware of these time limits. Failing to file within the designated timeframe means you forfeit the chance to sue later and potentially lose any compensation.

Call a Philadelphia Product Liability Lawyer

Navigating the complexities of a product liability case can be overwhelming. Understanding the elements of such claims, identifying defects, and knowing who is responsible for defective products are all crucial steps in building a solid case. A Philadelphia product liability lawyer can provide invaluable assistance during this process, ensuring you have the best chance at achieving a favorable outcome. Call Baratta Law LLC at 215-914-8132.

Contact Baratta Law

Main Form