Do we really need all those warnings on the labels of products we buy? Without question, yes. Ask anyone who has been injured by taking defective drugs like Vioxx, Bextra, or Baycol, using Fosomax or ReNu, being implanted with a faulty medical devices like Guidant pacemakers or Medtronic Sprint Fidelis cardiac leads, riding Yamaha Rhino ATVs or playing with dangerous products Mattel toys.
Ever heard of the pet owner who sued Kenmore after trying to dry her poodle in a microwave? How about the driver who sued Winnebago after getting injured when he got up from his driver’s seat for a cup of coffee and left the vehicle on cruise control? How could these people sue and successfully recover damages for lack of adequate warnings on such ridiculous facts? They couldn’t and they didn’t…these are some of the “urban legends” making the rounds of the internet that are completely fabricated stories. Unfortunately, too many people actually believe these stories and buy into the idea that the courts are rewarding the greedy. This type of propaganda is powerful and unfairly affects the mindset of ordinary citizens picked to sit on juries of legitimate cases.
Effective warnings, safe designs and adequate safety instructions are meant to protect the unsuspecting consumer. Defective products unnecessarily expose people to hazards. Whether those hazards could have been better guarded or warned about, if there was a safer alternative design, did the product comply with applicable safety standards and industry guidelines and did the product have a defect are questions a manufacturer must answer and compensate for when their products harm.
Does a product defect exist?
Richard J. Arsenault, 2011
