Danger

Defense attorneys involved in product liability litigation are familiar with claims alleging failure to warn against a manufacturer or seller. The typical failure to warn claim is fairly straightforward: the plaintiff asserts that the defendant placed inadequate warnings of potential hazards on or with the product and the lack of proper warnings was a proximate cause of harm to the plaintiff. Not all failure to warn claims are so basic, however. Many such claims have wrinkles that do not allow the standard analysis to be used, whether it involves a unique argument for insufficiency or the targeting of an uncommon defendant. Plaintiffs try to assert these non-traditional claims in the hope of finding additional sources of recovery, even if the outlook for success may appear bleak...