California Product Liability Lawyer Straight Talk: What is a Consumer Expectation Design Defect?

Some dangerous products are improperly designed or engineered, while others have manufacturing defects which lead to dangerous products. When you are severely injured while using a product in the manner in which it was intended to be used, the manufacturer must be held responsible, and you deserve money damages.

Every State has different product liability laws. In this article we discuss California's product liability laws. Specifically, design defect based upon the consumer expectation test.

A person injured by a defective product in California can bring two different types of design defects:

1. Risk Benefit Test

2. Consumer Expectation Test.

This article concerns the consumer expectation test. Under the consumer expectation test an injured victim claims the product's design was defective because the product did not perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would have expected it to perform.

To establish this claim under California product liability law, the injured person must prove all of the following:

1. That the defendant either manufactured, distributed, and/or sold the product.

2. That, at the time of the use, the product was substantially the same as when it left the defendant's possession. Or that any changes made to the product after it left the defendant's possession were reasonably foreseeable to the defendant.

3. That the product did not perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would have expected at the time of use.

4. That the product was used, or misused, in a way that was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant.

5. They were harmed; and

6. That the product's failure to perform safely was a substantial factor in causing them harm.

Under California law, the consumer expectation test is reserved for cases in which the everyday experience of the product's users permits a conclusion that the product's design violated minimum safety assumptions, and is thus defective regardless of expert opinion about the merits of the design.

In determining whether a product's safety satisfies the consumer expectation test, the jury considers the expectations of a hypothetical reasonable consumer, rather than those of the particular plaintiff in the case.

State-of-the-art evidence is not relevant when the plaintiff relies on a consumer expectation theory of design defect.

Disclaimer:

This article is not legal advice. This article is simplistic in order to achieve clarity. The circumstances of your case may vary from those described herein. The foregoing legal discussion is based upon California Product Liability Law. If you are a seriously injured by a product you should consult with a product liability lawyer. Finally, whenever you bring a court claim for money damages your credibility is always at issue. Always tell the truth. If the jury believes you are not being straight with them - you will lose. Be sure to hire an honest trial lawyer.