We trust that the products we buy are safe when used the way they are meant to be used. Most are. But every year, defective and dangerous products, vehicles, tools, medical devices, drugs, and household items, cause serious injuries and deaths that careful design, manufacturing, and warnings would have prevented. When that happens, Florida law gives the injured person a way to hold the company accountable. These are demanding cases, built on engineering, technical documents, and expert testimony, and they are fought hard by manufacturers with substantial resources. They are also, done right, among the most important cases in civil law, because holding a company responsible for a dangerous product protects the next person as much as it compensates the last.
Three kinds of product defect
The three kinds of product defect
Florida recognizes three distinct ways a product can be defective, and understanding which one applies is the starting point of any case. A design defect means the product is dangerous as designed, so that every unit coming off the line carries the same flaw, even when each is built exactly to specification. A manufacturing defect means the design was sound but something went wrong in the making of the particular item that injured you, so that it differs from the others and from what it was supposed to be. A failure to warn, sometimes called a marketing defect, means the product lacked the warnings or instructions a reasonable manufacturer would have provided about a danger that is not obvious. A single case can involve more than one of these, and part of the work is identifying every theory the facts support.
Strict liability, negligence, and warranty
A product case can rest on more than one legal theory, and this is one of the features that makes product liability different from an ordinary injury claim. Under strict liability, which Florida adopted decades ago, a manufacturer can be held responsible for placing a defective and unreasonably dangerous product into the stream of commerce that causes injury, without the injured person having to prove the company was careless. The focus is on the product, not the conduct. A claim can also be brought in negligence, where the focus is on the company’s failure to use reasonable care, and in breach of warranty, where the product failed to live up to what was promised. These theories can be pursued together, and which ones fit depends on the facts of the case.
The consumer-expectations test, and why it matters in Florida
For many design defect claims, Florida measures whether a product is unreasonably dangerous using the consumer-expectations test: a product is defective if it fails to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable way. This matters because some states use a narrower, more manufacturer-friendly standard that weighs the costs and benefits of a design, and Florida’s highest court reaffirmed the consumer-expectations test as the measure for design defects. For an injured Floridian, that reaffirmation is favorable, because it keeps the question grounded in what a reasonable consumer was entitled to expect rather than in a manufacturer’s after-the-fact cost analysis.
Who can be held responsible
Responsibility for a defective product can extend along the entire chain of distribution. The manufacturer that designed and built the product is the most common defendant, but the maker of a defective component, and in some circumstances the distributor or the retailer that sold the product, can also share responsibility. Identifying every party in that chain is not a technicality. It determines the insurance and the resources available to compensate a serious injury, and it can matter greatly when the manufacturer is out of business, out of the country, or hard to reach. Sorting out who is responsible is one of the first things a product case requires.
Comparative fault and the deadline
Florida applies comparative fault to product cases, which means a defense will often argue that the injured person misused the product or bears part of the responsibility, and any fault assigned to the injured person can reduce or, past a certain point, bar the recovery. Answering that argument is part of the case. The deadline deserves special attention, because it recently changed and because outdated articles still get it wrong. For most product injury claims, the time to file is now two years from the injury, and a separate twelve-year outer limit, measured from when the product was first delivered, can cut off older claims with only narrow exceptions. Because these rules are easy to miscount, confirming your deadline early is one of the most important first steps.
What a product liability case can recover
When a defective product causes serious harm, a Florida claim can seek the full range of damages: the cost of past and future medical care, lost income and lost earning capacity, and compensation for the pain, disability, disfigurement, and loss the injury caused. In a case where a defective product caused a death, the surviving family may bring a wrongful death claim for their own losses. What a case is worth turns on the severity and permanence of the harm and the strength of the proof, never on a number promised at the first phone call.
Why these cases take a team, and why my background fits them
Product liability cases are won on engineering, technical documents, and the cross-examination of a manufacturer’s experts, the kind of document-heavy, detail-driven work I have done throughout my career. My background is in complex litigation where the answer lives in mountains of technical material and in taking apart the other side’s experts on the stand, and that is exactly what these cases demand. I represent injured people, not manufacturers or insurance companies, and because building a product case against a well-funded company takes real resources, I take these on together with experienced co-counsel who focus on this work, pairing my trial and cross-examination experience with their depth. I handle your case personally, I came up in the courtroom as a public defender trying cases and cross-examining witnesses constantly, and I am prepared to put your case in front of a jury, which is often what moves a manufacturer to pay fair value. Learn more about my background.
Common Questions
What is a product liability claim?
It is a claim for injuries caused by a defective or unreasonably dangerous product. Florida recognizes three kinds of defect, a design defect, a manufacturing defect, and a failure to warn, and a claim can be based on strict liability, negligence, or breach of warranty. You do not always have to prove the company was careless, only that the product was defective and caused your harm.
Do I have to prove the company was negligent?
Not necessarily. Many product cases are brought under strict liability, which holds a manufacturer responsible for a defective and unreasonably dangerous product that caused injury, without proving the company was careless. Negligence and breach of warranty are additional theories that can apply depending on the facts.
Who can be held responsible for a defective product?
Responsibility can extend along the chain of distribution, to the manufacturer of the product, the maker of a defective component, and in some circumstances the distributor or retailer that sold it. Identifying every responsible party is part of building the case and protecting your recovery.
How long do I have to file a product liability claim in Florida?
For most product injury claims the deadline is now two years from the injury, and a separate twelve-year outer limit, measured from when the product was first delivered, can bar older claims with narrow exceptions. Because these deadlines changed in recent years and are easy to miscount, it is worth confirming yours early.
What is the consumer-expectations test?
It is the standard Florida uses for many design defect claims. A product is unreasonably dangerous if it fails to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable way. Florida reaffirmed this test as the measure for design defects, which is favorable to injured consumers.
This page is general information about Florida product liability law, not legal advice, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. The governing authorities include Florida’s strict product liability doctrine, adopted in West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 1976), and reaffirmed in Aubin v. Union Carbide Corp., 177 So. 3d 489 (Fla. 2015), the comparative fault statute in section 768.81, the two-year limitations period in section 95.11(5)(a), and the twelve-year statute of repose in section 95.031. Every case is different, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely on advertisements.
