San Antonio Texas Defective Product Attorneys
You reviewed the manual, you read all the instructions, you followed them exactly, and still the machine malfunctioned, and you were injured. If you or someone in your family has been injured while using a product you believed to be safe, you may have the right to bring a claim against the manufacturer, distributor, or seller of the product in order to recover the damages you suffered. Such a claim is called a products liability suit. Liability in a products liability suit can be based on improper, inadequate, or erroneous product manuals and instructions. This liability often falls within the category of failure to warn. Failure-to-warn liability arises from the responsible party’s failure to provide adequate warnings about possible injuries from a product’s use.
An experienced San Antonio products liability lawyer or Texas personal injury attorney can help determine whether a valid claim exists and provide information and representation throughout the entire legal process, in order to ensure that injured parties secure the compensation to which they are entitled. To help prevent injury in the first place, however, it is important to pay close attention to product manuals and instructions, which in most cases are designed to prevent injury, and in most cases they do.
When Do Product Manuals and Instructions Lead to Manufacturer or Seller Liability?
Products liability based on improper manuals or instructions can arise in either of two circumstances: when foreseeable risks could have been prevented by proper instructions or warnings, but the warnings were not given; or when the warnings or instructions themselves, when followed, caused the injuries. Simplicity and common sense should be employed in product manuals and instructions in order to make them as effective as possible, and they should include pictures or diagrams whenever possible, especially if users may speak a language other than the one in which the instructions are printed.
To be effective, a warning contained in a product manual should include a prominent signal word, like danger, warning, caution, or notice, in a typeface that captures attention, such as full caps and bold followed by an exclamation mark. It should identify the nature of the hazard, such as electrocution or electrical shock; it should describe the consequences of failure to follow the warning; it should state how the danger can be avoided (e.g., do not use near fire or flame, or do not remove safety guards). Product warnings may be communicated to the user through labels attached to the product, through owner’s manuals or package inserts, on the packaging itself, or via a combination of these methods. If warning labels are used, they should be located near the hazard about which they warn. For instance, if the warning relates to removal of a safety guard, the label should be placed on the product as close to the guard as practical. The labels themselves should be made and affixed to withstand the environmental conditions in which the product will be used. In other words, if the product will be used outdoors, the label should be made to stand up to sun, wind, rain, and other adverse weather conditions. If warnings are too extensive or complicated to include on a small product label, the label can simply direct the user to the manual for further instructions. The more complicated the product, the more complicated the warning may have to be in order to be deemed adequate.
A manufacturer or seller generally has no duty to include in its manual or instructions warning about open and obvious dangers, but they do have a duty to warn about hazards that could arise from any misuse or alteration of the product that is foreseeable. For instance, the manufacturer of a handgun does not have a duty to warn that guns may cause injuries, since causing injury is the purpose for which a gun is designed, but it generally does have a legal duty to warn that guards should not be removed from lawnmowers or snowblowers, especially if the manufacturer becomes aware that users are making these alterations in order to clean the machines or improve their performance.
In evaluating the adequacy of product manuals and instructions, the court may ask a series of questions. First, was it likely that the product would cause harm? Was the product being used in a manner that the manufacturer or seller could have reasonably foreseen it would be used? How serious was the harm that resulted? Was it possible or practical to place a warning label directly on the product? Was it reasonable for the manufacturer to assume a certain level of knowledge or sophistication by the user? Were the instructions accessible to and understandable by the average user?
Based on the answers to these questions, the manufacturer or seller may raise several defenses against a failure-to-warn claim. It may argue, for instance, that it had no duty to include a particular warning, because the danger was open and obvious (as in the handgun example, above). Or it may defend on the basis that the injured party was a sophisticated user of the product and should have known how to use it and avoid the danger. Other possible defenses include actual knowledge of the risks involved, assumption of the risk, and comparative or contributory fault.
The sophisticated user defense may arise when, for instance, a chemist is injured by while doing a scientific experiment. A seller may defend on the basis of the user’s actual knowledge when, for example, the seller engaged in a detailed discussion of the potential hazard at the time of sale. Assumption of the risk is a related defense, arising when the user knew of the risk, whether or not a warning was given, and went ahead with using the product in a particular manner anyhow. And comparative or contributory fault (or negligence) may be argued by the manufacturer or seller in situations in which it shares responsibility for the accident with the user, based on the user’s own negligent conduct.
A manufacturer’s duty to warn continues even after the sale of the product. In other words, if a product maker or seller becomes aware, post-sale, that a product has a previously unknown potential to cause injury, it must, if possible, communicate that information to the persons who should be warned. This duty may exist only if the users are not aware of the risk, and the same defenses may apply as those, discussed above, relating to time-of-sale instructions.
Although a manufacturer may escape liability for injuries resulting from its otherwise safe product if it provided an appropriate product manual and gave proper instructions, but the user failed to heed them, a manufacturer cannot evade responsibility for an unsafe product by warning the user, no matter how extensive the warnings given. If an unsafe product can be made safe, the manufacturer must make it safe, and product manuals and instructions alone will not suffice to make an otherwise defective product safe.
If you have been injured by a product that was not accompanied by a proper manual or adequate instructions, you may be able to make a claim against the manufacturer or seller. When seeking an Texas defective product attorney to represent you in connection with such a claim, be sure to investigate his or her background in products liability law. Ask questions about his or her training and experience so that you can make an informed decision about whether this is the right person to zealously represent your interests against a big company that may have many more resources than you do to fight the claims against it. Only with a veteran products liability or personal injury attorney on your side can you be sure to achieve an outcome that best compensates you for your losses.
DISCLAIMER: This site and any information contained herein are intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek competent legal counsel for advice on any legal matter.