How does the doctrine of “assumption of risk” apply in product liability cases?

The doctrine of “assumption of risk” is an important defense used by defendants in product liability cases in California. This is because manufacturers and sellers of products are generally liable for any injuries their products cause, regardless of fault. However, the doctrine of “assumption of risk” can be used as a defense against product liability claims if the plaintiff voluntarily took on the risk that their use of the product could lead to injury or losses. Under California law, the plaintiff is said to have assumed the risk if they were aware of any potential risks associated with the product before using it and voluntarily accepted them. This means that the plaintiff took on the responsibility for any potential harm that could have come from the use of the product. In a product liability case, a defendant may argue that the plaintiff assumed the risk of potential danger, absolving the defendant of liability. The defendant must prove that the plaintiff was aware of the potential risk, was warned of the potential risk, and voluntarily chose to use the product anyway. For example, if a plaintiff uses a product whose label includes a warning of potential injury, they may be found to have assumed the risk, making them ineligible to receive damages from the defendant. On the other hand, if the plaintiff had no knowledge of any potential danger, they may be found eligible to receive damages due to the negligence of the defendant.

Related FAQs

What is the difference between a manufacturer’s warranty and product liability law?
What is a “market withdrawal”?
How does a plaintiff prove causation in a design defect claim?
What is a “strict products liability” claim?
What is the economic loss doctrine?
Are products with “open and obvious” defects liable?
What is the legal standard of care for manufacturers?
What is the “consumer expectation test” and “risk-utility test”?
What happens when a product defect causes a person’s death?
What are some defenses a manufacturer might make in a product liability case?

How does the doctrine of “assumption of risk” apply in product liability cases?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts