What is the legal standard for determining if a product is “unreasonably dangerous”?

In Texas, the legal standard for determining if a product is “unreasonably dangerous” is whether or not the product, when used as intended, poses a “substantial risk” of injury or death beyond that which would be expected by an ordinary consumer. To meet this standard, the plaintiff must prove that the product was more dangerous than expected, and that this higher level of danger was not adequately communicated to the consumer. This standard is higher than the average consumer’s expectation of a product; that is, the court will not consider a product “unreasonably dangerous” if a reasonable person would expect that the product may cause injury or death. Courts will consider the design, warnings, and instructions of the product when determining if the product is “unreasonably dangerous.” For example, a product that comes with a warning that it should not be used near a heat source would be considered “unreasonably dangerous” if, when used as directed, it caused a fire or explosion. Similarly, a product that should have been designed better to prevent a foreseeable injury or death, such as a seatbelt that snapped off during a crash, would be deemed “unreasonably dangerous” by a court. In short, for a product to be found “unreasonably dangerous” in Texas, the plaintiff must prove that the product posed a “substantial risk” of injury or death beyond what would be expected by an ordinary consumer. The product must also have had insufficient warnings or instructions, or must have been designed in such a way that it posed an increased risk of harm.

Related FAQs

Is a manufacturer liable for products they did not manufacture but only sold?
What is the “state of the art” defense?
How does product liability law apply to products that are used for commercial purposes?
Is a manufacturer responsible for product defects discovered after a sale?
What is a “negligence claim”?
How does a plaintiff prove causation in a product liability case?
How does the doctrine of “assumption of risk” apply in product liability cases?
What is a “risk-benefit analysis”?
What is a “failure to warn” claim?
What is the “risk-benefit test”?

What is the legal standard for determining if a product is “unreasonably dangerous”?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts