SAN FRANCISCO

Manufacturing defects arise from an error in the manufacturing process. For example, this can occur if an incorrect component or a foreign object is inserted into the product during manufacturing, the components are combined incorrectly, or the product failed to meet production specifications in some other way. A manufacturer is strictly liable for injuries caused by a product that is not made to the manufacturer’s own specification regardless of any negligence or lack of prior knowledge.

Design defects are the consequence of a problem with the design or composition of the product (versus a mistake in the manufacturing process). In other words, the product, while manufactured in accordance with all specifications, might be inherently defective due to a fault in the product design specifications. For example, a blender manufacturer could be liable for designing a blender that does not have a proper pressure release valve thereby leading to a buildup of pressure and heat during use. A consumer who uses the blender with this design defect could be severely injured by burns even if the product is built to the manufacturer’s specifications because the blender fails to perform in a manner reasonably expected by the consumer.

A failure to warn occurs when the product labeling, directions for use, or warnings are ineffective or misleading, leading to the product’s failure to safely and effectively meet the expectations of the consumer. Even if a product is manufactured according to its required specifications, and the specifications meet all requirements for an effective product, the product can nonetheless be defective if it is not labeled correctly or fails to warn the consumer of an unknown risk when the product is used in a foreseeable manner. A lawsuit against a seller or service provider could be based on concealment of a material fact regarding a defective product or service, making of false representations to induce the purchase by the consumer of the defective goods or services.

By taking basic steps sellers, whether intentionally or not, make certain implied warranties regarding the product. In particular, this includes the implied warranty of merchantability, a warranty that includes, consistent with Uniform Commercial Code § 2-314, a commitment that the goods are fit for the ordinary purposes for which they are used, for example, that a hearing aid will not explode or cause damage to the consumer.

Consumers have the right to expect that the product they are purchasing is consistent in kind, quality, and quantity within each unit and among all units. Consumers can also expect a manufacturer or seller to properly describe the product and expect the product to conform to any manufacturer’s labels.

When a product is found to be unreasonably dangerous to the user, each seller in the distribution chain could be subject to strict liability for personal injury or property damage caused by the product defect even if the defendants exercised all possible care (meaning the seller was not negligent). To prevail in this action, the consumer would typically have to prove that the:

• Product or service was defective.
• Consumer suffered damages or injury resulting from the defect.
• Defect was the substantial cause of the damages or injury.

Governmental authorities have passed several broad acts that are meant to provide additional protections to consumers. These include:

Consumer Product Safety Act of 1972 (CPSA), which authorizes the identification of consumer products that pose an unreasonable risk of injury and the creation of standards to remove or lessen that risk (15 U.S.C. § 2051).

Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act), which prohibits unfair, deceptive, or fraudulent practices (15 U.S.C. § 58).

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), which governs the safety of food, drugs, medical devices, and cosmetics (21 U.S.C. § 301). For more information, visit our Pharmaceutical Injury.

Federal Hazardous Substance Act (FHSA), which requires hazardous household products to meet label requirements

Cases involving a faulty or a defective product are often complex and resource-intensive and should be addressed by a high-quality law firm with extensive experience and a proven court record. Synergist Law has Product Liability Attorneys with unrivaled medical, technical and commercial expertise and proudly represents clients with injuries in the greater Bay Area, Los Angles as well as across California.

Founded by the managing attorney Sami Sedghani, the firm operates with a philosophy of tireless attention and advocacy to help the catastrophically injured and their families who are often up against very powerful opposition.

Our San Francisco Product Liability Attorneys are among the best in California and are available 24/7, to take your call and give you a FREE, no-obligation case evaluation.

Synergist law has resources and targeted expertise in technical, medical, and commercial issues that give our clients an edge when facing the insurance company experts. Our technical expertise concerning product specifications, product design, and product manufacturing results in unrivaled trial advocacy and cross-examination of the opposing experts. With a proven track record of litigating high-stakes cases, our talented San Francisco Product Liability Attorneys will dominate the opposition and get the maximum recovery for you or your loved ones.

As an accident victim, it’s extremely important that you hire the best attorney for your case. Dealing with insurance companies on your own is your worst option. You owe it to yourself and your family to call a San Francisco Product Liability Attorney at Synergist law to receive a FREE, no-obligation case evaluation.

When it comes to putting pressure on the opposition, trust a San Francisco Trial Attorney at Synergist Law. Our client-first approach means that your case will be handled compassionately by a professional trial attorney who will provide you with regular updates.