Thousands of Americans are hurt each year by products they trust to be safe. These injuries can happen because of any product—from a helicopter with manufacturing defects to a child's toy with parts that break off too easily.
When a harmful product causes injuries, those harmed may bring a product liability lawsuit against the responsible party (or parties). A product liability lawsuit is a legal claim brought against a manufacturer, distributor, or seller of a product that is allegedly defective or dangerous and has caused harm to a consumer.
The product liability lawyers at Wisner Baum have represented thousands of clients harmed by defective and dangerous products. Since 1985, we have won over $4 billion in verdicts and settlements across all areas of practice. If you need justice for the harm you suffered, we have the resources and experience to hold wrongdoers accountable and obtain maximum compensation for you and your family.
To speak with a product liability lawyer about your case, give us a call at (310) 207-3233 or fill out our contact form. Wisner Baum has law offices throughout California and we offer free case evaluations. If we do not win compensation on your behalf, you owe us nothing.
When you buy something, it comes with hidden promises. The law calls these "warranties." These promises say the product will work as it should and be safe for normal use. If these promises are broken and you get hurt, you might have a product liability case, even if the company didn't mean to make something dangerous.
Think of a product liability lawsuit as a way to hold companies responsible when their products hurt people. It's like having a safety net for consumers. When you buy something, you expect it to be safe when used as intended. If it is unsafe and you are harmed, you can seek justice and accountability in a product liability lawsuit.
Product liability can be based on negligence but is often associated with strict liability. Negligence means a defendant failed to exercise reasonable care in a product's design, manufacture, or warnings. Strict liability is a bit different. This means the defendant can be held liable regardless of intent or knowledge of a defective product that caused harm.
Sometimes, products are built wrong. Imagine buying a bicycle where the brakes weren't put together correctly at the factory. That's a manufacturing defect.
Other times, the basic design itself is not safe. Picture a baby crib designed with gaps wide enough for a baby's head to get stuck. Even if the crib is built precisely as planned, the design itself is inherently dangerous.
Companies must tell you about important risks. When a company sells a product that injures you without clearly informing of the risk of harm, that is a failure to warn. This can include missing safety instructions on a product label or user manual, unclear explanations about potential dangers associated with using the product as intended, or simply not providing any product warnings.
Breach of warranty happens when a product fails to meet the promises made by the manufacturer, either through explicit written guarantees or implied expectations of safety and performance. These promises can be about the product's quality, function, or safety, and when they are not fulfilled, the manufacturer may be legally responsible for any resulting harm or damage.
There are two main types: express warranties (specific written promises) and implied warranties (unspoken expectations that a product will work safely and as intended).
To win a product liability case, you need to prove that:
Proving liability in a product liability claim can be complex. A seasoned product liability attorney can help you by:
Not all product liability cases end up in federal court. In fact, most consumer product liability lawsuits are litigated in state courts, like the California state court system.
The following is true under California law:
You do not necessarily have to prove a company was negligent. In California, “strict liability” means if a product hurts you while you are using it normally, you can hold the company responsible without proving they were careless or negligent.
Your attorney simply needs to prove that the product was defective, you used it as intended, and you got hurt because of the defect.
You can sue anyone in the chain of distribution. California product liability law is unique in that you can file a lawsuit against any defendant, from the manufacturer all the way to the store that sold it. Most states have more limitations on who you can sue.
For example, you may bring a lawsuit in California against:
Each defendant may be 100% responsible (“jointly and severally liable”) for your economic damages. However, in California, each defendant is only responsible for their share of non-economic damages (such as pain and suffering) based on their percentage of fault. This is different from many states that:
Plaintiffs can allege market share liability. In California, market share liability means that if you are hurt by a product but cannot identify which specific company made it, you can sue all the companies that made similar products during the relevant time period, and they may be held responsible based on their percentage of market share.
An example of market share liability is the DES cases (Sindell v. Abbott Labs). In this litigation, women alleged a drug caused their cancer their mothers took during pregnancy but could not identify which company made the specific pills their mothers used. California allowed them to sue all DES manufacturers and hold each responsible according to their share of the DES market at that time.
For market share liability to apply in California, a product liability lawyer must show:
Market share liability is a powerful tool in California product liability cases. Most states do not allow market share liability.
In a product liability lawsuit, the manufacturer, distributor, retailer, or any other party in the supply chain can be held liable for defects in the product. Each party has a duty to ensure that the product is safe for consumer use, and failure to do so can result in legal consequences.
A product liability lawsuit can stem from any consumer product. That said, the following types of products have previously been implicated in recalls and product liability claims:
You may have a valid product liability claim if a defective product has injured you. Below are some key indicators to help you understand whether you have a case:
This is not an exhaustive list; it is just to give you an idea of what an attorney will look for during an initial consultation. The best way to determine if you have a case is to speak with a product liability lawyer who can evaluate the facts of your situation and advise you on the best course of action. Remember, most product liability lawyers offer free case evaluations, so you have nothing to lose by contacting us.
No, a product does not need to be recalled for you to file a product liability lawsuit.
Recalls and lawsuits are separate. You can sue over a product that was never recalled, and conversely, a recall does not automatically mean that you will win a product liability claim.
However, a recall can help your case because:
On the flip side, if you keep using a product after learning about a recall:
In short, while a recall can provide strong evidence of a product defect, your right to sue does not depend on whether a recall has occurred. The key is always whether the product was defective and caused your injury while being used normally, regardless of whether there was a recall.
As of 2025, several large-scale product liability claims are awaiting final settlement approval or are still in litigation. Some of the largest ongoing product liability cases are:
3M Earplug Lawsuits: This is the largest current product liability litigation, with over 200,000 claims. Lawsuits allege 3M manufactured and sold defective earplugs that caused hearing loss and tinnitus among military service members and veterans. Last year, 3M announced a settlement worth over $6 billion.
Antipsychotic Lawsuits: Women who developed breast cancer after taking Risperdal, Invega, and Zyprexa are pursuing legal claims alleging the drug manufacturers failed to warn of the cancer risk.
Toxic Baby Food Lawsuits: Parents who fed their children baby foods from several well-known brands have filed lawsuits alleging that the defendant companies failed to warn about dangerous arsenic, lead, and mercury levels. Studies have shown that babies exposed to these toxic metals may develop autism or ADHD. The legal claims allege defective manufacturing, negligence, failure to warn consumers, and strict liability for design and manufacturing defects.
Zantac Cancer Lawsuits: Thousands of lawsuits allege drug maker defendants failed to warn about the risk of developing several types of cancer. While some of the defendants have settled cases, the litigation continues in courts throughout the country.
Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Lawsuits: Claims against J&J allege talcum powder products caused or increased their risk of developing ovarian cancer or mesothelioma.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits: Thousands of claims have been consolidated in federal court alleging L’Oreal and other companies manufactured dangerous hair relaxer products containing harmful chemicals that can disrupt the endocrine system and cause cancer.
Roundup Cancer Lawsuits: While the majority of cases filed throughout the country have been settled, some cases are still in litigation. Roundup lawsuits allege Monsanto (Bayer) failed to warn consumers that the weed killer’s active ingredient can cause cancer.
Suboxone Lawsuits: The Suboxone litigation is in the early stages but already more than 650 claims have been filed in federal court. These lawsuits allege Suboxone film, which is used for the treatment of opiate addiction, causes dental erosion and tooth decay.
Depo Provera Lawsuits: This is another emerging litigation. Plaintiffs have filed suit against Pfizer alleging the company’s injectable birth control medication Depo Provera causes brain tumors called meningiomas.
The compensation you may receive in a successful product liability claim is tied to your claims for damages.
Punitive damages are an additional financial penalty beyond actual damages designed to prevent or deter similar misconduct. While they are not available in every case, they can reach millions in cases of gross negligence.
Many product liability attorneys work on a contingency fee basis, which means they only get paid if you win your case. The fees typically range from 33% to 40% of the settlement amount, but these percentages may vary depending on a variety of factors.
To find the best product liability lawyer for your case, consider the following tips:
Remember, hiring the right lawyer can significantly affect the outcome of your product liability case. If you would like to learn more about your legal rights in a product liability claim, contact the attorneys at Wisner Baum today.
We are a California law firm with offices in:
Start your claim today by scheduling a free case consultation with the product liability lawyers at Wisner Baum.
"Wisner Baum gave exceptional attention to all aspects of the case, detailed inquiry, and tenacious overview of all the information submitted. The paralegals are efficient and diligent. I was completely surprised to find an empathic personal message to take care of my own health during the challenging time of being a full-time caretaker.*"
In May of 2019, the jury in the case of Pilliod et al. v, Monsanto Company ordered the agrochemical giant to pay $2.055 billion in damages to the plaintiffs, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, a Bay Area couple in their 70s. R. Brent Wisner served as co-lead trial attorney for the Pilliods, delivering the opening and closing statements and cross-examining several of Monsanto’s experts. Wisner Baum managing shareholder, Michael Baum and attorney Pedram Esfandiary also served on the trial team in the Pilliod case.
The judge later reduced their award to $87M. Monsanto appealed the Pilliod’s verdict which the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District denied on August 9, 2021. Monsanto then requested the California Supreme Court review the appeal’s court decision, which the court denied on Nov. 17, 2021. Monsanto (Bayer) then submitted a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court which SCOTUS denied on June 27, 2022, allowing the final judgment of $87M to remain intact.
$289.2 million jury verdict in Monsanto Roundup trial
Wisner Baum co-represented Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco jury ordered Monsanto to pay $39.25 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages to Mr. Johnson, a former groundskeeper who alleged exposure to Monsanto’s herbicides caused him to develop terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
Months after the jury verdict, the judge overseeing the trial reduced the punitive damages to $39.25 million. Mr. Johnson decided to accept the remittitur, bringing the adjusted amount awarded to Mr. Johnson $78.5 million.
Monsanto (Bayer) appealed the verdict and Johnson cross appealed. On July 20, 2020, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict against Monsanto but reduced Mr. Johnson’s award to $20.5 million. The company chose not to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, ending the litigation.
In 2016, Wisner Baum attorney Timothy A. Loranger and six other attorneys in the Plaintiffs’ Management Committee were able to secure a $265 million settlement for victims of the 2015 Amtrak 188 derailment in Philadelphia, one of the largest in the U.S. for 2016.