Three kinds of defect
A manufacturing defect means the item departed from its own design — a single bad unit. These are the most straightforward to prove because the specification supplies the comparison, but they usually affect few people.
A design defect means the product was dangerous as designed, so every unit shares the problem. Courts assess this either by consumer expectations or by weighing the risk against the burden of a safer alternative design, and claimants are frequently expected to identify a practical alternative that was available at the time.
A warning defect, or failure to warn, means the product carried inadequate instructions or failed to disclose a non-obvious risk. Manufacturers are not required to warn of dangers that are open and obvious, but they can be liable for risks known or knowable when the product was sold.
Strict liability and who can be sued
Most states apply strict liability to product claims, meaning the injured person need not prove negligence — only that the product was defective, that the defect existed when it left the defendant’s control, and that it caused injury while the product was being used in a reasonably foreseeable way.
Liability generally runs along the whole distribution chain: manufacturer, component maker, distributor and retailer. Many states have sealed container or innocent seller statutes that release retailers who merely passed on a sealed product, provided the manufacturer is available to be sued.
Misuse is the common defence. Using a product in a way the maker did not intend can defeat a claim, but only if the misuse was genuinely unforeseeable — foreseeable misuse is something manufacturers are generally expected to design and warn against.
A recall is evidence, not a verdict
A recall does not automatically establish liability, and its absence does not defeat a claim. Recalls are frequently voluntary and carefully worded. What a recall does change is notice — continuing to sell or failing to act after one is significant evidence.
False advertising and labelling claims
Not every consumer claim involves injury. False advertising and mislabelling claims assert that a product was not what it was represented to be — disputed “natural” or “made in USA” claims, overstated health benefits, slack-filled packaging, or a headline price that omits mandatory fees.
These claims are usually brought under state consumer protection statutes, which often provide statutory damages and fee-shifting even where actual loss is small. Because the representation is identical for every purchaser, they certify as class actions far more readily than injury claims, where causation and damages differ from person to person.
Sections in This Category
Each section below groups the cases that share a defendant, a product or a legal theory, and sets out what those cases have in common before linking to the individual coverage.
- Energy Drink and Supplement Lawsuits — 11 cases
- Period and Intimate Care Product Lawsuits — 5 cases
Related Claims Elsewhere on the Site
These pages sit in other categories but turn on the same cause of action covered here.