New Jersey law provides an opportunity for an individual or family who suffered injuries because of a defective or dangerous product to recover damages against the manufacturer or supplier. These claims can be based on, among other things, harmful drugs, unsafe vehicles and items made dangerous by design flaws or defects. People who are injured because of these issues may seek compensation to help them recover. Lawsuits and publicity can also successfully protect others or effect a change in the product.
Consumers are responsible for reading labels and understanding all about what foods and beverages they are ingesting. But what if something dangerous is included in a product, and the negligent manufacturer doesn't put a warning about the risks on the label or packaging? In New Jersey, that would likely be a cause of action under the law. Manufacturers have a duty to the public to put appropriate warnings of any risk on products that might cause injury.
Consumers are entitled to safety in their homes, cars, workplaces and recreational areas unless warned otherwise. They should be able to trust the medicines they take, the food they eat and the products they use will not cause harm other than what is clearly suggested as possible. When something does go wrong and an injury results, it becomes a matter of products liability.
A recent news story is an unfortunate follow-up to our post about product recalls. It involves food – one of the most difficult situations to deal with thanks to the worldwide supply of present day. New Jersey supermarkets provide countless items grown and shipped from across the country and around the world. Tracking a dangerous product is time-consuming and likely an inexact process.
Most moms and dads are careful drivers, especially when their children are riding in the car, too. New Jersey, as in other states, has specific safety rules and guidelines that apply to drivers and passengers. They are especially stringent regarding children. Accident injury risk, however, apparently increases when children are away from their parents. It's likely not an intentional action or inaction that might cause the problem. Rather, a recent survey has found a less diligent approach to safety might be to blame.
Product liability occurs when a manufacturer or anyone in the supply chain for a product is found liable for damages that are caused by a product. According to Cornell University's law library, plaintiffs must prove that a defect exists as part of the basis for a product liability lawsuit.
Thousands of products are recalled each year by manufacturers who either voluntarily recall items that may be dangers or are made to recall defective products by regulatory agencies. It can be impossible for consumers to keep up with the number of recalls, creating situations where consumers unknowingly use dangerous products. In most cases, the manufacturer is responsible for ensuring the safety of a product, not the consumer.
Some residents of Burlington, New Jersey, may have wondered if their experience with a product could make for a product liability claim or lawsuit. The case law that makes up the current environment of product liability law was created over many years and continues to change. For example, a hundred years ago, product liability suits were uncommon. Today, laws and regulations to protect consumers take some responsibility off the buyer and place it on the manufacturer or distributor.
Consumers expect that products they purchase will be safe, reliable and do what they are supposed to do. Following directions and using them properly is a matter of personal responsibility. What happens, though, when you do everything right, but still suffer a loss of some kind from a dangerous product? New Jersey law provides legal remedies that can help.
When a person or people suffer injuries due to dangerous products, they have a right to seek compensation for damages. New Jersey residents are likely familiar with product liability cases against drug companies. Recently, a woman sued Merck Sharp & Dohme Corporation over their drug Fosamax. The jury in that case delivered a verdict for the defendant. According to the verdict, the jury found that the company was not responsible for the fact that the woman developed osteonecrosis in her jaw.