In a case of first impression, a state Superior Court panel hasruled that plaintiffs in products liability “failure-to-warn” lawsuitsare entitled to a rebuttable presumption that the absent warning wouldhave been followed, if it had been given by the defendant.

The ruling, announced yesterday, favoring a “heeding presumption,”makes it more feasible for plaintiffs to make the causation element ofa claim for strict products liability, since it is difficult to produceevidence that a proper warning that was never given would have beenfollowed.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]