Have you been involved in an accident? Please contact us immediately for a FREE CONSULTATION
Every day, Philadelphia residents purchase and use countless products, from vehicles and appliances to medications and children's toys, trusting that these items meet basic safety standards. Unfortunately, corporations sometimes prioritize profits over safety, releasing defective products that cause serious injuries, disabilities, and deaths. When design flaws, manufacturing defects, or inadequate warnings lead to harm, victims face mounting medical bills, lost wages, and life-altering consequences.
Pennsylvania law recognizes that manufacturers and sellers bear responsibility for ensuring product safety. The state's strict liability doctrine allows injured consumers to recover compensation by proving that a product was defective and that the defect caused their injuries, without necessarily establishing that the manufacturer acted carelessly or negligently. This consumer-protective legal framework levels the playing field between individual victims and corporations with vast resources.
Edelstein Martin & Nelson represents Philadelphia consumers injured by defective products throughout the region. From automotive component failures that cause accidents on I-95 to dangerous household items that injure residents in neighborhoods across Center City, South Philadelphia, and Northeast Philadelphia, the firm investigates product defects, identifies liable parties, and pursues maximum compensation. As an experienced personal injury law firm in Philadelphia, Edelstein Martin & Nelson combines technical expertise with aggressive advocacy to hold negligent corporations accountable.
At our firm, we understand that product liability claims stem from three primary categories of defects, each requiring a unique legal approach. Design defects originate in a product's blueprint before manufacturing starts, affecting every item of that type. Manufacturing defects arise during production, where specific units deviate from their intended specifications. Warning defects occur when insufficient instructions or safety information leave consumers unaware of potential risks. Our experienced product liability lawyers in Philadelphia are skilled at identifying the applicable defect category, gathering the necessary evidence, and crafting legal strategies tailored to the specific circumstances of each case.
Design defects exist when a product's entire concept or blueprint creates unreasonable dangers. Even when manufactured perfectly in accordance with specifications, these products pose risks to users. Common examples include vehicles with excessive rollover tendencies, power tools lacking necessary guards, children's products with built-in choking hazards, and medical devices prone to failure under foreseeable conditions.
Pennsylvania courts evaluate design defects using two alternative tests established in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc. The consumer expectations test asks whether the product performed more dangerously than ordinary consumers would anticipate. The risk-utility test examines whether a product's risks outweigh its benefits, considering factors such as the availability of safer alternative designs, the feasibility of making products safer without sacrificing utility, and the social value of the product's design relative to its dangers.
Proving design defects typically requires expert testimony from engineers and product safety specialists. An accident attorney in Philadelphia works with these experts to demonstrate that feasible alternative designs existed when products were conceived, that implementing safer designs was economically and technologically practical, and that alternative designs would have prevented injuries without substantially impairing product functionality.
Manufacturing defects occur during production when individual items or batches deviate from intended designs. Unlike design defects affecting all products of a type, manufacturing defects impact specific units that differ from properly manufactured versions. Examples include pharmaceutical batches contaminated during production, vehicle components with improper welds or assembly, electronics containing substandard materials, and food products contaminated during processing.
Manufacturing defect cases often present clearer liability because properly manufactured versions demonstrate what the product should have been. A civil litigation lawyer in Philadelphia establishes manufacturing defects by comparing defective units to product specifications and quality control standards, presenting testing results from properly manufactured items, and demonstrating how deviations from design specifications caused injuries.
Preserving defective products becomes critical in manufacturing defect cases. Physical evidence showing how the item differs from its intended design provides compelling proof. Attorneys photograph products immediately after incidents, secure items preventing alteration or destruction, and engage experts to examine products before manufacturers can claim improper handling or post-incident changes affected evidence.
Warning defects occur when manufacturers fail to provide sufficient safety information, instructions, or hazard warnings. Even properly designed and manufactured products can be unreasonably dangerous without adequate guidance about risks, proper use, and necessary precautions. Common warning defect examples include medications lacking sufficient side effect information, chemicals sold without proper handling instructions, machinery missing operational safety warnings, and products marketed for uses without adequate testing.
Pennsylvania law requires warnings about non-obvious dangers that manufacturers know or should know through reasonable testing and research. Warnings must be conspicuous and easily visible to users, comprehensible to intended user populations, including those with limited English proficiency, and specific about hazards and how to avoid them. Generic warnings like "use with caution" rarely satisfy legal requirements when specific risks demand detailed information.
At Edelstein Martin & Nelson, our team of product liability lawyers based in Philadelphia carefully evaluates the effectiveness of warnings by reviewing all product labeling, packaging, instruction manuals, user guides, marketing materials, advertising claims, and point-of-sale materials provided to consumers. We depend on expert testimony to assess whether the warnings met industry standards, effectively communicated known risks to reasonable consumers, and could have prevented injuries if they had been provided.
Corporate decision-making documents frequently provide powerful evidence in failure-to-warn cases. Internal memoranda showing manufacturers understood risks but chose not to warn consumers, testing results revealing dangers that were not disclosed, and marketing strategies emphasizing benefits while minimizing known risks all demonstrate conscious choices to endanger consumers for profit.
Vehicle defects cause catastrophic accidents throughout Philadelphia's roadways and highways. Defective components, including brakes, steering systems, airbags, seatbelts, and tires, can render vehicles uncontrollable or fail to protect occupants during collisions. Recent years have witnessed massive recalls involving Takata airbags, General Motors ignition switches, and various unintended acceleration issues. Yet, many defective vehicles remain on the road years after manufacturers identified problems.
Automotive defects commonly implicated in Philadelphia accidents include brake systems failing to stop vehicles adequately, steering mechanisms causing loss of directional control, airbags failing to deploy or deploying improperly, causing injuries, seatbelts failing to restrain occupants during crashes, and tire defects, including tread separation and blowouts. These failures cause accidents on I-95, the Schuylkill Expressway, Roosevelt Boulevard, and throughout city streets in neighborhoods from Manayunk to Port Richmond.
Proving automotive defects requires specialized expertise. An injury lawyer in Philadelphia coordinates with accident reconstruction experts who analyze collision dynamics, automotive engineers who examine failed components, and metallurgists who test materials and manufacturing processes. These experts distinguish between defects causing accidents and driver error or road conditions, establishing that product failures, not human mistakes, caused injuries.
Philadelphia homes contain countless products that can cause serious injuries when defectively designed or manufactured. Common household product defects include space heaters and appliances causing fires, defective lithium-ion batteries in electronics causing explosions, pressure cookers exploding due to faulty pressure release valves, furniture tipping over onto children, and tools causing injuries due to missing guards or defective safety mechanisms.
Household product injuries occur throughout Philadelphia neighborhoods, from apartments in University City to single-family homes in Northeast Philadelphia, from rowhomes in South Philadelphia to suburban residences in surrounding counties. These incidents frequently involve fires causing property damage and severe burns, electrical shocks from faulty wiring or components, lacerations from defective blades or sharp edges, and poisoning from toxic materials or chemical exposures.
An accident attorney in Philadelphia investigating household product defects examines whether manufacturers conducted adequate safety testing, complied with Consumer Product Safety Commission standards, provided sufficient warnings about foreseeable risks, and responded appropriately when defects became known through consumer complaints or injury reports.
Prescription medications and medical devices should improve health, not cause additional harm. Yet pharmaceutical companies repeatedly release dangerous drugs and defective devices that injure patients treated at hospitals and medical facilities throughout Philadelphia County and surrounding areas. Common pharmaceutical and medical device defects include medications causing undisclosed side effects, contaminated drug batches, defective hip and knee implants failing prematurely, hernia mesh causing infections and chronic pain, and faulty cardiac devices, including pacemakers and defibrillators.
Medical device and pharmaceutical cases often involve nationwide litigation, with hundreds or thousands of injured patients pursuing claims against manufacturers. These mass tort and multidistrict litigation (MDL) cases consolidate discovery and pretrial proceedings while preserving individual compensation claims. A civil litigation lawyer in Philadelphia, experienced in mass tort litigation, navigates these complex procedural frameworks, ensuring Philadelphia clients' interests are protected within larger litigation structures while maintaining a focus on individual injuries and damages.
Pharmaceutical failure-to-warn claims frequently involve selective disclosure, where manufacturers emphasize benefits while minimizing risks. Internal documents often reveal companies understood dangers years before adequately warning healthcare providers or patients. When pharmaceutical representatives downplay risks to physicians practicing in Philadelphia or marketing materials overstate benefits, patients suffer injuries that proper disclosure might have prevented.
Philadelphia's active construction and manufacturing sectors rely on equipment that must meet rigorous safety standards. When scaffolding, ladders, power tools, and heavy machinery fail due to defects, workers suffer catastrophic injuries. Common industrial equipment defects include fall protection equipment failing under load, power tools lacking proper guards, causing amputations and lacerations, defective nail guns firing without trigger engagement, and heavy equipment with defective brakes, hydraulics, or controls.
While workers' compensation provides benefits for workplace injuries, Pennsylvania law allows additional third-party product liability claims against equipment manufacturers and suppliers. These third-party claims can recover damages that workers' compensation does not cover, including full pain-and-suffering compensation, complete wage-loss recovery without statutory caps, and compensation for a permanently diminished quality of life. A personal injury law firm in Philadelphia that understands both workers' compensation and product liability law maximizes total recovery by pursuing all available claims simultaneously.
Product liability cases require expert testimony explaining technical issues beyond jurors' common knowledge. Engineering experts examine products, conduct testing, compare items to specifications and industry standards, and explain how defects occurred and why they caused failures. Medical experts establish causation by connecting defective products to specific injuries and describing how those injuries resulted from product failures rather than pre-existing conditions or other causes.
Our experienced product liability lawyer in Philadelphia engages qualified experts witnesses early in the case development process. These experts (whether medical, accident reconstruction, or economic) preserve and examine defective products before evidence deteriorates, review manufacturer documents, including design specifications and testing records, analyze similar incidents and complaints involving the same products, and prepare reports supporting claims and testimony for depositions and trial.
Expert testimony must satisfy Pennsylvania Rule of Evidence 702, requiring experts to possess sufficient qualifications, apply reliable methodologies, and base opinions on adequate factual foundations. Courts scrutinize expert credentials and methodologies, excluding unreliable testimony. Edelstein Martin & Nelson works with recognized experts whose credentials and methodologies withstand defense challenges, ensuring critical evidence reaches juries.
The most potent evidence of product liability often comes from manufacturers' own documents. Discovery in product liability cases seeks design documents and specifications, internal testing results and safety analyses, consumer complaint records and injury reports, communications with regulatory agencies, and recall decisions and timing. These documents establish what companies knew about defects, when they learned of dangers, and what actions they took or failed to take.
Quality control records reveal whether manufacturers maintained proper production standards. When defect rates exceed acceptable tolerances, testing identifies problems that are ignored, or safety concerns are documented but not addressed, this evidence establishes negligence supporting both compensatory and punitive damages. An accident attorney in Philadelphia uses aggressive discovery to uncover documents that manufacturers often resist producing, including internal memoranda discussing cost-benefit analyses of recalls versus injury liability, communications showing executives understood risks but chose not to act, and records of similar incidents the manufacturer failed to disclose.
Pennsylvania applies modified comparative negligence under 42 Pa.C.S. § 7102, reducing compensation if injured parties share fault and barring recovery if victims are more than 50% responsible. Manufacturers frequently argue comparative negligence, claiming that victims misused products, ignored warnings, altered products after purchase, or failed to maintain them properly.
Our team of experienced Philadelphia product liability lawyers anticipates these defenses by documenting proper product use through photographs and witness testimony, demonstrating that injuries occurred despite following instructions, proving any alleged "misuse" was foreseeable and should have been addressed in design or warnings, and showing that product failures would have happened regardless of any user conduct. Expert testimony often establishes that products should have been designed to prevent injuries even during foreseeable misuse, as manufacturers must anticipate how products will actually be used, not just how they should be used ideally.
Economic damages compensate for quantifiable financial harm, including emergency medical treatment and hospitalization, surgery and rehabilitation costs, prescription medications and medical devices, ongoing medical care and future treatment needs, lost wages during recovery periods, and diminished earning capacity when injuries prevent a return to previous employment.
Catastrophic injuries often require lifetime medical care. Burn injuries from defective products may necessitate multiple reconstructive surgeries. Traumatic brain injuries can require permanent assisted living. Amputations from defective equipment necessitate prosthetics and ongoing therapy. Edelstein Martin & Nelson’s Philadelphia product liability lawyers work with medical experts and life care planners to project future medical needs and costs, ensuring settlements and verdicts provide sufficient resources for lifetime care requirements.
Non-economic damages address intangible but profound harm, including physical pain and discomfort from injuries, emotional distress, anxiety, and depression, permanent disfigurement and scarring, disability limiting activities and independence, and loss of enjoyment of life and relationships. Pennsylvania does not cap non-economic damages in product liability cases, allowing juries to award compensation reflecting the full scope of victims' suffering.
Proving non-economic damages requires compelling evidence. An injury lawyer in Philadelphia presents medical testimony about pain levels and limitations, psychological evaluations documenting emotional trauma and mental health impacts, victim testimony when possible describing how injuries changed daily life, and family testimony regarding observed changes in victims' personalities, capabilities, and relationships.
Punitive damages punish defendants for particularly reckless or intentional misconduct and deter similar behavior. Pennsylvania allows punitive damages when defendants' conduct demonstrates willful, wanton, or reckless disregard for consumer safety. Evidence supporting punitive damages includes continuing to sell products after learning of severe defects, concealing known dangers from regulators and consumers, conducting inadequate safety testing despite awareness of potential risks, and prioritizing profits over safety in documented corporate decisions.
Punitive damage awards can substantially exceed compensatory damages, particularly against corporate defendants with significant assets. Courts consider defendants' financial resources when setting amounts, ensuring awards are sufficient to punish and deter without being excessive. At Edelstein Martin & Nelson, we are committed to representing Philadelphia consumers who have been injured.
Whether it's an automotive component failure that leads to an accident on I-95 or a dangerous household item that harms residents in Center City, South Philadelphia, and Northeast Philadelphia, our firm diligently investigates product defects, identifies liable parties, and strives to obtain maximum compensation for our clients. With our extensive experience in personal injury law, we combine technical expertise with aggressive advocacy to hold negligent corporations accountable and ensure that our clients receive the justice they deserve.
When defective products cause deaths, Pennsylvania provides two separate claims under 42 Pa.C.S. § 8301 (wrongful death) and 42 Pa.C.S. § 8302 (survival action). Wrongful death claims compensate surviving family members for loss of financial support and contributions, loss of companionship, comfort, and guidance, funeral and burial expenses, and counseling costs for grieving relatives. Survival actions preserve claims the deceased would have had if they survived, including medical expenses before death, lost earnings during survival, and pain and suffering before death.
A civil litigation lawyer in Philadelphia handles both claims simultaneously, ensuring families receive full compensation for devastating losses while holding negligent manufacturers accountable for preventable deaths. These cases require sensitivity to families' grief while aggressively pursuing justice and compensation.
In Pennsylvania, there is a two-year statute of limitations for filing product liability lawsuits, meaning that action must be taken within this timeframe. While there are exceptions under the discovery rule that can extend deadlines if injuries or their causes aren't immediately apparent, it is still crucial to act promptly.
Pennsylvania law requires product liability lawsuits to be filed within two years from the injury date under 42 Pa.C.S. § 5524. This statute of limitations is strictly enforced: cases filed even one day late are typically dismissed with no opportunity to recover compensation. The deadline is jurisdictional, meaning courts lack authority to hear untimely claims regardless of their merit or the severity of injuries involved.
The statute generally begins running on the date of the injury, not when the defective products were manufactured, sold, or purchased. For immediate injuries, such as a defective ladder collapsing and causing a fall, the accrual date is more precise. However, when injuries develop gradually or their connection to faulty products is not immediately obvious, determining accrual dates becomes more complex.
Pennsylvania recognizes a discovery rule in certain product liability cases, tolling the statute of limitations until victims discover, or reasonably should have discovered, their injuries and their connection to defective products. This rule primarily applies when injuries manifest gradually or causes are not immediately obvious: common scenarios in pharmaceutical and medical device cases, toxic exposure claims, and cases involving latent defects.
For example, when medications cause organ damage developing over months or years, when implanted devices fail long after surgery, or when toxic materials in products cause illnesses appearing years after exposure, the discovery rule may extend filing deadlines. However, courts apply objective standards, examining when reasonable people in victims' positions would have made the connection between injuries and product defects, not when particular victims actually did so.
At Edelstein Martin & Nelson, our team of Philadelphia product liability lawyers carefully analyzes whether the discovery rule applies in each case. We understand that defendants often argue for earlier accrual dates, while our clients—plaintiffs—benefit from later discovery. However, we recognize that relying on extensions of the discovery rule carries risks; if courts reject these extension arguments and the standard limitation periods have expired, our clients could lose all rights to compensation. This is why we strive to navigate these complexities with our clients' best interests in mind.
Even when discovery rule extensions may apply, delaying attorney consultation creates unnecessary risks. Evidence deteriorates over time: products are discarded, documents are destroyed in routine retention practices, witnesses' memories fade, and manufacturers may reorganize or dissolve. Prompt consultation with an injury lawyer in Philadelphia protects rights by ensuring timely filing before any applicable deadline, preserving evidence through immediate investigation and spoliation letters, and documenting injuries and their progression. At the same time, information remains fresh, and identifying all potential defendants before the statute of limitations expires.
At Edelstein Martin & Nelson, we recognize the profound impact of manufacturing defects on consumers. These defects occur during production when items diverge from intended designs, unlike design defects that affect all products of a type. Our cases often involve contaminated pharmaceuticals, faulty vehicle components, substandard electronics, and tainted food products. We are dedicated to holding manufacturers accountable, as these cases usually present clearer liability, helping victims achieve the justice and compensation they deserve.
Product liability cases demand sophisticated legal knowledge, technical expertise, and substantial resources. Edelstein Martin & Nelson has represented Philadelphia consumers in product liability litigation for decades, developing a comprehensive understanding of Pennsylvania's strict liability doctrine and applicable precedents, federal regulations governing consumer products and medical devices, and effective investigation and litigation strategies for proving defective product claims.
Our firm has handled cases involving all product categories: automotive defects, pharmaceutical injuries, medical device failures, dangerous consumer products, industrial equipment failures, and toxic exposures. This breadth of experience provides insight into common defense tactics, effective expert strategies, and efficient paths to maximum compensation.
Successful product liability cases hinge on credible expert testimony. Edelstein Martin & Nelson has established connections with top experts from various fields. These include engineers who assess products and clarify technical failures, medical specialists who determine causation and outline future care needs, accident reconstructionists who examine how defects led to incidents, and industry professionals who testify about manufacturing standards and corporate practices. These experts offer authoritative testimony that supports claims and counters defense arguments.
Manufacturers and their insurers deploy substantial resources defending product liability claims. Competing effectively requires comparable resources and determination. As an established personal injury law firm in Philadelphia, Edelstein Martin & Nelson invests significant resources in product liability cases, advancing expert fees, investigation costs, and litigation expenses without requiring upfront payments from clients. This commitment allows thorough case development without pressuring clients to accept inadequate settlements due to financial constraints.
At Edelstein Martin & Nelson, we understand the profound impact that defective products can have on individuals and families. Our firm is dedicated to representing Philadelphia consumers who these dangerous items have injured have injured.
We actively investigate product defects and work tirelessly to identify the parties responsible for the harm caused. With our experienced team advocating for your rights, we are committed to pursuing maximum compensation for our clients, whether faulty automotive components, hazardous household items, or any other defective product has injured them. We blend technical expertise with a resolute approach to hold negligent corporations accountable and ensure that our clients receive the justice they deserve.
Beyond legal expertise, Edelstein Martin & Nelson provides compassionate support during difficult times. Product-related injuries often occur suddenly, leaving victims dealing with physical pain, financial stress, and uncertainty about the future. The firm's attorneys provide clear communication, regular updates, and personalized attention, ensuring clients understand legal processes and feel supported throughout their cases. Every client receives direct access to experienced attorneys who handle their cases personally.
When defective products cause injuries, victims deserve justice and compensation. Pennsylvania law provides remedies, but navigating complex product liability claims requires experienced legal representation.
At Edelstein Martin & Nelson, our team of Philadelphia product liability lawyers offers free, confidential consultations to Philadelphia consumers who have been injured. During consultations, attorneys review the circumstances of the incident, evaluate potential claims, explain legal rights and options, and answer questions about the claims process. These consultations impose no obligations: families can understand their legal positions and make informed decisions without financial pressure.
At our firm, we handle product liability cases on a contingency fee basis. This means that our clients pay no upfront costs and incur no attorney fees unless we successfully recover compensation through a settlement or verdict. We advance all case expenses, including expert fees, investigation costs, and court fees, and recover them only from successful outcomes. This arrangement helps eliminate financial barriers to obtaining legal representation and aligns our attorneys' interests with our clients' goals of maximizing recovery.
Edelstein Martin & Nelson represents clients throughout Philadelphia County and surrounding areas, including Center City, University City, South Philadelphia, Northeast Philadelphia, Manayunk, Roxborough, Chestnut Hill, and Fishtown. The firm also serves clients in Montgomery, Bucks, Chester, and Delaware counties.
Product liability claims involve strict time limits and complex legal requirements. Evidence disappears quickly, and manufacturers begin building defenses immediately. Contacting an experienced accident attorney in Philadelphia promptly protects legal rights, preserves critical evidence, and positions cases for maximum recovery.
Contact Edelstein Martin & Nelson by calling 1-888-630-4409 or through its website to schedule a free consultation. The firm's attorneys are ready to evaluate claims, answer questions, and provide the aggressive, experienced representation Philadelphia consumers deserve when defective products cause injuries. Pennsylvania law gives injured consumers the power to hold negligent manufacturers accountable. With experienced legal representation, victims can secure compensation and ensure that corporate messages prioritize consumer safety.
Address
123 S Broad St #1820
Philadelphia, PA 19109
Email: lnelson@law-pa.com
Edelstein Martin & Nelson Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | © Copyright | All Rights Reserved.
