In a Maryland strict liability case, a plaintiff must show that there was a defect in the product that existed when the product left the defendant’s control, that the defect makes the product unreasonably dangerous, the defect caused the plaintiff’s injuries, and that it was foreseeable that the product would be in such condition when it reached the consumer. A defect may include the failure to warn a consumer of the risks involved in using the product.
In considering a strict liability claim, a court will consider whether the plaintiff proved that the defendant’s conduct actually caused the plaintiff’s injuries. In cases where only one negligent act is at issue, Maryland courts consider whether but-for the defendant’s conduct, the injuries would not have occurred. In cases where two or more independent acts caused the plaintiff’s injury, Maryland courts consider whether it is more likely than not that the defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff’s injuries. A defendant may also try to defend against a strict liability claim by attempting to shift the blame on the consumer. A defendant may be successful if can show that the consumer was negligent by voluntarily and unreasonably confronting a known danger.
In a recent product liability case before a federal appeals court, the court considered whether the plaintiff had sufficiently proven a strict liability claim. In that case, the plaintiff rented an electric drain rodder from the Home Depot to unclog a drain in his home. He was using the device at home and because the powered reverse did not work, he tried to remove the cable by hand. The cable wrapped around his arm and he was thrown to the ground. His hand was badly injured and most of his right index finger had to be amputated. The plaintiff sued the Home Depot and the product manufacturer for negligence, breach of warranty, and strict product liability.
The court rejected the plaintiff’s strict liability claim against the manufacturer based on the lack of evidence the plaintiff had provided. The court found that the plaintiff failed to produce any evidence that the device was defective when the manufacturer shipped it, or that it had not been misused or altered by other consumers who had rented it before the plaintiff. However, the court found the case could proceed against the Home Depot for the breach of warranty claim. The court held that although the plaintiff signed a contract agreeing to rent the product “as is,” it also promised the product “in good working condition.” Thus, Home Depot could not disclaim liability as a result of a breach of its promise of “good working condition.”
Contact a Maryland Product Liability Lawyer
If you or a loved one has been injured by a defective or dangerous product, contact a Maryland product liability attorney to discuss your case. The product liability attorneys at Lebowitz & Mzhen provide aggressive representation to consumers in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. who have been hurt due to a defective product. We will guide you through each step of the legal process, ranging from the investigation to litigation and settlement negotiations. To set up a free consultation regarding a product liability claim, call us toll-free at (800) 654-1949 or contact us online.