What Kind of Proof Must Be Provided to Prove a Product Was Defective?

In any product liability case in Texas, the plaintiff must show the defect was, in fact, responsible for harm or damage. To successfully verify a claim, the plaintiff must provide proof that:

But how do you prove the product was defective to begin with? Answering this question can be more complex than it appears.

The type of defect may affect the way you prove faultiness in a product. The defect may occur in the design, the manufacture, or the marketing of an item, and each defect will require a different legal approach. To prove a design problem, the plaintiff must demonstrate that there is a safer way to create the product and that the existing design causes an unreasonable hazard. A manufacturing defect must show a problem that exists in the manufacturing stage – not in the design specifications. A marketing defect is often the inadequacy or non-existence of a warning.

Two main legal strategies are commonly used for proving product defects in Texas courts. The first is recreating the defect for presentation during the case. It is hard to argue with a recreated or noticeable defect the court can visually see and understand. However, many product liability cases do not have an example or direct proof of a product defect. Instead, they must rely on circumstantial evidence that indicates the unquestionable presence of a defect.

Texas courts often support the legal doctrine “res ipsa loquitur” or “the thing proves itself.” In pharmaceutical liability claims, for instance, there is often not a physical product at hand to show a defect. If the harm could only have been caused by the product, the harm itself is proof enough that the product was defective. Other precedents of circumstantial evidence that have been successfully used include reasoning that the harm was an outcome that ordinarily happens because of a defect and could not be attributable to other causes. For circumstantial evidence to win a product liability claim, though, the reasoning and supporting evidence must be compelling.

As long as the plaintiff can prove the product was in nearly the same condition as it would be if it was new, he or she may successfully bring a claim against the product manufacturer, designer, or marketer. However, proving that a used product was in like-new condition could present difficulties. You may also have trouble demonstrating a marketing defect if you did not purchase the product in its original packaging.

If possible, try to recover as much of the original product as you can and take pictures of the incident and your injuries. The more physical proof you can provide, the better your chances are of holding the responsible party accountable. Product manufacturers and brands are liable for creating reasonably safe products. It is your right to hold them responsible when they fail to do so.

Product liability (defective product) claims and personal injury go hand in hand. At Gordon, Elias & Seely LLP, we specialize in all kinds of personal injury cases, including defective product claims. Every case is slightly different, and this article only touches on some of the strategies lawyers use to prove defects in products. For a personalized case evaluation, we are more than willing to discuss your incident and determine if there is a reasonable product liability case present. Contact us today to learn more.

The post What Kind of Proof Must Be Provided to Prove a Product Was Defective? appeared first on GES Injury Attorneys.