How does a court determine if a product is “unreasonably dangerous”?

When determining if a product is unreasonably dangerous, courts in Washington must consider the following factors: 1. The usefulness and desirability of the product: Courts will first look to see if the product has a normal use that is wanted by the public. 2. The safety aspects built into the product: Courts will next consider whether the product has any safety features to reduce the potential risk to users. 3. The availability of an alternative design: If an alternative design could reduce the risk of harm, courts will consider that. 4. The manufacturer’s ability to eliminate the unsafe condition: Courts will also look to see if the manufacturer could have done anything to reduce the risks of the product. 5. The user’s ability to avoid danger by exercising care: Finally, courts will ask if the user had any way of avoiding harm by exercising due care. When making a determination, courts will balance all of these factors to determine if the product is unreasonably dangerous. If it is, then the manufacturer may be liable for any injuries that are caused by their product.

Related FAQs

Is a consumer able to recover damages in a product liability case?
What types of damages can be recovered in a product liability claim?
How is the price of a defective product determined?
What is “strict tort liability”?
What is a “risk-benefit analysis”?
Are there any restrictions on the types of products that can be subject to product liability law?
How is a company’s financial responsibility determined in a product liability case?
What is a “strict products liability” claim?
What are the differences between a manufacturer’s warranty and a product liability claim?
How does the doctrine of “assumption of risk” apply in product liability cases?

How does a court determine if a product is “unreasonably dangerous”?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts