Arizona Accident Lawyer Blog

Finding a Peoria product liability attorney or a defective product injury lawyer can be a challenge. First of all, there are substantial differences between a typical personal injury case and a product liability case. Thus, choosing the best possible lawyer when you have been injured due to a defective or poorly-made product, make sure you go to an attorney you can trust.

It’s important to consider that product liability claims require proof that the product was faulty. There are three common ways in which a product can be proven defective in order to allow its purchaser to recover damages for injury. The first is defective design. A poorly-designed product often hurts numerous people by malfunctioning or breaking due to serious flaws. A person who has been seriously injured by a dangerously defective product in Peoria, Arizona, often learns from the investigation of a hardworking personal injury lawyer that the same product has caused harm to people throughout the United States.

Continue reading "The Difference Between a Product Liability and Personal Injury Case" »

Severe injuries to a child. An allegation and evidence of a dangerous, defective product. How will this get resolved? Fortunately, through our jury system. I recently read about this tragic case where Trevor Dennis, a minor, suffered severe burns due to an alleged defective heater. The defendant, Coleman Company, has thus far refused to accept responsibility or settle the case. To some, this may sound like a story destined for injustice. However, perhaps those people do not realize the strength of our civil justice system: the jury. Nationally renowned law firm Bisnar Chase is handling the matter for the plaintiffs, so we know the plaintiffs are going to get a fair shot at justice. Without prejudging the case – it is the job of the jury to decide the facts of what happened and come to a final conclusion – I think it is fair to say that many defendants that have wrongfully denied justice have had to answer to the jury.

This, then, is not a final judgment of what occurred, but a great testament to the fact that everybody – from the young child to the international corporation – all can, for a day, sit on the same playing field, having to answer to the same jury. Justice can be delayed, but it should not be denied. We look forward to awaiting the outcome of the jury trial and hope that justice is done: whatever the jury deems that to be.

Source report:http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS152701+20-Mar-2008+BW20080320

In almost every state in this country, people who are hurt because of a dangerous and defective product have the right to bring a lawsuit against the person who sold them that product. It is not the job of almost any American citizen to try to track down the person in some foreign land and hope that they will somehow show up in an American courtroom and pay their "fair share" of the dangerous product they designed or manufactured. Instead, we count on the retailers who buy these things to have proper insurance so that if they sell something that badly injures an American, the American doesn't have to do the impossible.

On top of that, the leverage exists largely with the person who has a relationship with this company in a foreign land. In other words, if some company in communist China accidentally manufactures a dangerous product that kills somebody, is that company likely to show up for a lawsuit in Pima County, Arizona or Maricopa County, Arizona? Of course not. Perhaps if they might lose the business of Wal-Mart, Best Buy, or some other big box retailer, they would show up to keep that business.

However, Arizona is the only state we know of that requires the Arizona resident to not only sue the person who sold them the product, but also to try to find a way to bring in every single individual from the time the dangerous and defective product that caused the serious injury was created and designed, through its manufacturing, and through all the different shipment channels and anyone who may have contributed to the sale of the dangerous product. This is ridiculous, but this is the law. This is also one of the many reasons that anybody who's been injured as a result of a dangerous and defective product should immediately contact an experienced Phoenix product liability lawyer they can find to help them with their Arizona product liability claim.

Dangerous products kill people. These companies should not be allowed to continue to operate. Getting a lawyer on board who can try to track down the responsible parties as quickly as possible can be vital. I am not a big believer in telling people to "hurry" in hiring a lawyer before they are ready. I would not do that with an Arizona product liability case either. The problem is, Arizona law requires even the best personal injury lawyers to find these different people in the "chain" of the product. Moreover, the product itself can be vital, and failing to get a lawyer can often lead to the failure to secure the product and make sure it is not destroyed, thereby destroying the evidence that could create the claim.

Jardine Cribs has recalled an additional 56,000 units, expanding to almost 400,000 the number of cribs that have been recalled as a result of a strangulation and entrapment hazard to infants and toddlers. These cribs were sold at Kids World, Geoffrey Stores, Toys-R-Us, and Babies-R-Us stores nationwide from March 2004 through January 2009. These cribs were sold in the range of $220.00 to $330.00.

This child product recall raises many questions about Arizona Product Liability Law. For instance, if a defective product cause serious injury, what can an Arizona resident do to recover for that injury? The first step is to hire the best product liability lawyers they can after a serious injury of wrongful death that came as a result of a defective product. Also, this raises the question as to whether or not a recall is required in order to pursue a serious injury claim due to a defective product that cause injury to an Arizona resident. The answer is an absolute no. While a recall may be evidence of a dangerous product that never should have been on the market, the reality is that determining whether or not there is a defective product that was placed on the market that never should have been there and never should have caused injury is a much more complicated analysis.

The reality is that it is not easy to simply answer the question as to whether or not an individual claim for serious injury in Arizona should be pursued. The most experienced product liability lawyers will do everything they can to explain to the family involved the likelihood of success and the amount of time it would take to pursue an individual claim. This varies on a great many factors. For instance, Arizona is one of the only states, if not the only state currently in the United States, that does not follow a traditional product liability model when it comes to suing a Chinese manufacturer. So many of our products are created in China that most states in this country you can sue the store that sold the product. The belief has always been that the store that sold the product is in the best position to have insurance or to go after that store in China with which they do business. It has always been the belief that the injury victim is not in a good position to try and sue the communist Chinese corporation for the defective product directly. However, Arizona Courts have recently made this requirement for Arizona residents only. Therefore, a production liability claim in Arizona as a result of a serious injury or wrongful death is much more complicated than it is most other states. Therefore, the analysis of an expert in product liability law is vital prior to making a decision whether to pursue a claim as a result of a defective product that causes a serious injury.

We understand that product recalls in Arizona, and the rest of the country, are not perfect, but we are hopeful that anyone whom bought a Jardine Crib will take advantage of this recall to the vital and necessary safety of the infants and toddlers throughout the United States that go to bed every night in one of these cribs.

Campaign donations are a powerful thing. According to the House of Representatives, a jury cannot be trusted to decide how much money is reasonable compensation to somebody injured by the negligence of a doctor. According to the same people, a jury is fully capable to decide whether a man is guilty, and whether he should be put to death for his crime. A jury is capable of life and death decisions, but not capable to decide decisions relating to money. How can this be? I guess it just depends on who is giving you donations.

A criminal jury and civil jury come from the same people, who live in the same county. They are chosen randomly, so the same people that sit on a criminal trial could have just as easily sat that same day on a medical negligence trial.

For instance, here is an example of two trials that may occur in Maricopa county, during the same week, with the same jurors making the decision:

Trial 1: A doctor is accused of leaving a medical instrument in a baby, which causes severe permanent damage. The baby will suffer for a lifetime from the carelessness. They jury has to decide how much money the insurance company will pay in fair compensation.

Trial 2: A man is accused of shooting a stranger in cold-blood to steal $20. The stranger died. The jury has to decide whether that man is guilty, and whether he should be put to death for his crime.

The same people who became jurors in the first trial could just as easily have been on the second trial. In one case, money rests on a jury’s decision. In the other case, a man’s life rests on a jury’s decision.

Continue reading "WE TRUST YOU TO DECIDE LIFE AND DEATH, WE JUST DO NOT TRUST YOUR OPINION ON MONEY" »