What are some defenses a manufacturer might make in a product liability case?

In North Carolina, a manufacturer of a defective product can be held liable for any injuries caused by their product. In a products liability case, a manufacturer may present certain defenses to limit their liability. One defense is that the manufacturer did not have full knowledge of the defects or potential risks that the product posed. This is known as the “state of the art” defense, which argues that the manufacturer acted diligently to create a safe product based on the current level of knowledge. For example, if a tire manufacturer created a safe tire based on the current industry standards but the tire design was later found to be unsafe, the tire manufacturer may have a “state of the art” defense. Another defense is that the plaintiff did not use the product in a reasonable manner. For example, if the plaintiff failed to follow the product instructions or used the product in a dangerous or reckless way, they may not be entitled to a claim against the manufacturer. Another defense is that the product was modified in some way after the manufacturer released it. For example, if the manufacturer released a safe product but the plaintiff then modified the product in some way that made it unsafe and caused injuries, the manufacturer may not be liable for the injuries. Finally, the manufacturer may also argue that the plaintiff assumed the risks of using the product. This means that the manufacturer may argue that the risks of using the product were clearly stated or should have been known by the plaintiff. For example, if the manufacturer warned of the dangers of using power tools in their instructions and the plaintiff was injured while using the power tool, the manufacturer may argue that the plaintiff assumed the risks of using the tool. In conclusion, North Carolina product liability law allows for manufacturers to raise certain defenses in order to limit their liability. These defenses may include “state of the art” defense, plaintiff misuse of the product, product modification, and assumption of risk.

Related FAQs

What is the “risk-utility test”?
What factors do courts consider when determining whether a product is defective?
What is the “learned intermediary doctrine”?
How does the doctrine of “assumption of risk” apply in product liability cases?
What is “strict liability”?
What is the economic loss doctrine?
How does a plaintiff prove that a product was defectively designed?
What is a “market share” theory of liability?
How does product liability law work?
What is the difference between negligence and strict liability in product liability law?

What are some defenses a manufacturer might make in a product liability case?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts