About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

31 Tort & Ins. L.J. 879 (1995-1996)
Products Liability Law Revisited: A Realistic Perspective

handle is hein.journals/ttip31 and id is 891 raw text is: PRODUCTS LIABILITY LAW REVISITED: A REALISTIC PERSPECTIVE Marc S. Moller and Paul Indig I. OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT PRODUCTS LIABILITY LANDSCAPE Products liability is an area of the law that most lay people seem instinctively to understand. Products, especially consumer goods, are all around us. We use them and we take it for granted that they should work well and be designed properly. If a product fails and causes injury, the failure is considered abnormal and the responsibility of the manufacturer or seller. Indeed, certain well-known products liability cases have become part of the American popular consciousness: poorly designed Ford Pintos exploding on impact, highly flammable children's pajamas igniting, and more recently, too hot McDonald's coffee causing third-degree burns when spilled. Several years ago a Saturday Night Live skit, mimicking a line of products liability case law, had a family feverishly emptying bottle after bottle of Coca-Cola in a frantic attempt to find a mouse inside of one and strike it rich.' In fact, products liability cases are among the hardest and costliest suits to initiate and win. Notwithstanding popular misconceptions, it is axiomatic that just because one is hurt by a product, it does not necessarily follow that the manufacturer or seller is legally responsible for the injury. Now, more than ever before, it is essential for the practitioner evaluating whether to embark upon a products liability case to be especially cognizant of the challenges and pitfalls. This is particularly so when considering a design defect case. Only a realistic approach at the outset will save the products liability practitioner costly frustration later on, create reasonable client expectations, and increase the client's chances for success. Generally, to succeed in a products liability case, plaintiff has the considerable 1. See, e.g., Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Misenheimer, 261 S.W.2d 775 (Ark. 1953); Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Dolinski, 420 P.2d 855 (Nev. 1966). Marc S. Moller is a senior partner in the law firm of Kreindler & Kreindler in New York City, and represents plaintiffs in aviation and products liability actions. Paul Indig is a litigation associate with Kreindler & Kreindler.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most