Product Liability Lawyer in Concord, NC Defects, Warnings and Liability

Strict liability was legislated away

Most people assume a defective product means automatic responsibility. G.S. 99B-1.1 says the opposite in one line: there shall be no strict liability in tort in product liability actions. Everything therefore turns on proving that a manufacturer or seller acted unreasonably, which puts the design history, the testing file and the warning language at the center of the case rather than the injury itself.

What each theory has to prove

A design claim under G.S. 99B-6(a) requires proof that the manufacturer acted unreasonably in designing the product and that this caused the harm, plus one of two further showings. Either it unreasonably failed to adopt a safer, practical, feasible alternative design that would have cut the risk without substantially impairing usefulness. Or the design was so unreasonable that a reasonable person aware of the relevant facts would not use the product.

A warning claim under G.S. 99B-5(a) asks whether the seller unreasonably failed to warn. Proof must then show either that the product created an unreasonably dangerous condition it knew or should have known about when the product left its control, or that it learned of a substantial risk afterward and failed to act. Subsection (b) closes one door flatly: a seller is not liable for failing to warn of a risk that is open and obvious, or that amounts to common knowledge.

Twelve years from the day it was bought

The deadline most people find is three years from when the harm became apparent under G.S. 1-52(16). The one that actually ends cases sits in G.S. 1-46.1(1), which bars any action for injury or death based on an alleged product defect brought more than twelve years after the date of initial purchase for use or consumption. That runs from a receipt rather than from an injury, so a saw, ladder, space heater or industrial press long in service can be beyond reach on the day it fails.

Older equipment is not unusual around here. The Gibson Manufacturing Company was incorporated in 1899 by J.W. Cannon, and its mill went up in two stages between 1900 and 1903. Mill and warehouse buildings across the county have since been repurposed with machinery and fixtures that changed hands more than once.

The defenses the legislature wrote out in advance

G.S. 99B-4 lists three complete bars. Use contrary to express and adequate instructions or warnings, where the user knew or should have known of them. Knowledge of a defect inconsistent with safe use, followed by unreasonable and voluntary exposure to the danger. Or a failure to exercise reasonable care in using the product where that failure was a proximate cause. The third is ordinary carelessness by the injured person, and in this state that ends a claim instead of shrinking it.

Another bar sits in G.S. 99B-3. Where an alteration or modification made after the product left the maker's control was a proximate cause, there is no liability unless the change followed the maker's instructions or had its express consent. Alteration is defined to include failure to observe routine care and maintenance, while excluding ordinary wear and tear. A missing service record can therefore matter as much as a missing guard.

A dog bite is a different statute with a narrower reach

G.S. 67-4.4 is often quoted as making dog owners strictly liable, and it does say the owner of a dangerous dog is strictly liable in civil damages for injuries the dog inflicts. The reach of that sentence depends on the definition behind it. Under G.S. 67-4.1(a)(1), a dangerous dog is one that without provocation has killed or inflicted severe injury on a person. It also covers a dog determined to be potentially dangerous by the person or board designated by the local animal control authority, and one kept or trained for fighting.

Potentially dangerous status is an administrative finding, not a description. Written notice to the owner comes first, objections are filed within three days, a hearing follows within ten days, and appeal runs to superior court for a hearing de novo. The article also does not apply where the injured person was trespassing or tormenting the animal. Absent that record, the case is an ordinary negligence claim, sometimes helped by G.S. 67-12, which makes an owner liable in damages for letting a dog over six months old run at large at night unaccompanied.

Keep the object, and keep the paperwork with it

Stop using the item and set it aside intact, including pieces that look like debris. Keep the carton, the manual, the warranty card and the receipt, and photograph the data plate, serial number, lot code and every legible warning label. Never send it back for credit, swap it under warranty, or drop it at a service depot, because all three routes hand the only evidence to the other side.

After contact, and how a fee gets tested

Early work is inventory work: what the product is, when it was first sold, who holds it now, and whether that twelve-year date is already a problem. Claims above twenty-five thousand dollars go to the superior court division under G.S. 7A-243, and smaller ones belong in district court on Union Street South.

Fees are governed by Rule 1.5 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, which contains no percentage. It bars an illegal or clearly excessive fee and gives eight factors for measuring one, including the difficulty of the questions and the skill required. Where payment depends on the result, Rule 1.5(c) requires a signed writing with the percentages at settlement, at trial and on appeal.