One common requirement in all Michigan product liability claims is a finding of a defect in a product. The defect may be based on the following:Negligent design of the product
Under Michigan law, the injured person must prove the following:The product was defective.The defect caused the injury or damage.An injury or damage was sustained.
One of the most common defective product claims involves negligent design. These cases involve the design decisions made by the manufacturer during the creation of the product. The focus of this claim is that, even 레플리카쇼핑몰 if the product was in its intended condition, there was something inherently wrong with the product that caused the damage.
To prove that the manufacturer failed to exercise reasonable care, the injured person must demonstrate that the product created an unreasonable risk or foreseeable injury.
To establish a prima facie case, the injured person must present evidence regarding either:The magnitude of the risk of injury presented by the defect in the product and the reasonableness of the proposed alternative designs, orOther evidence concerning the “unreasonableness” of the risks in the design
The application of this approach to each case is critically important. You should consult with an attorney.
In contrast to negligent design cases, a negligent manufacture case focuses on the actual product. The key question is whether the product that caused injury was different from the intended condition.
Even though the focus is on the product, the injured person must still show that the manufacturer failed to manufacture its product so as to eliminate any unreasonable risk of foreseeable injury.
Michigan product liability law recognizes that some products are inherently dangerous. These dangers cannot be eliminated through the design process. In these instances, a manufacturer may have a duty to warn the user of these hazards.
Michigan courts have ruled that manufacturers have a duty to warn purchasers or users of dangers associated with the intended use or reasonably foreseeable misuse of their products, but the scope of the duty is not unlimited.
Some issues that apply in most warning cases include:Whether there was a duty to warn is a question of law for the judge to decideThe duty to warn arises when the manufacturer knows or should know of the risk of injuryThe standard of care requires the effective
communication of adequate, accurate informationThe duty to warn and instruct extends to the foreseeable misuse of a productThere is no duty to warn with regard to unforeseeable misuses
The two-pronged standard for evaluating a defect in a product, as stated in Owens v. Allis-Chalmers Corp, 414 Mich 413, 326 NW2d 372 (1982), was adopted by the Michigan Legislature in 1996.
The present Michigan Product Liability Act requires proof that:The product was unreasonably dangerous at the time it left the manufacturer’s control, and
A practical and technically feasible alternative design was available at the time of production.
The Michigan Product Liability Act dramatically impacts all Michigan defective product claims. Michigan defective product law includes many important requirements. If you or a loved one was seriously injured by a defective product, talk with an experienced Michigan product liability lawyer today. You should consult with an attorney to learn more about your rights under Michigan law.
Attorney Marya Sieminski joined the Law Offices of Sam Bernstein in 2003. She is admitted to practice law in Michigan state courts and in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. She earned her Bachelor of Science degree at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and graduated magna cum laude from Wayne State University Law School. Marya has worked as a trial lawyer for 10 years and exclusively represented victims in personal injury litigation and in workers compensation claims. She also was appointed by the Governor to serve on the State of Michigan Workers Compensation Qualifications Advisory Committee.