Orlando Product Liability Lawyer

Orlando Product Liability Lawyer: Holding Manufacturers Accountable

When a defective product injures you, Florida law does not require you to prove the manufacturer was careless. Under the doctrine of strict liability, adopted by the Florida Supreme Court in West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co. (1976), you only need to show the product was defective and unreasonably dangerous, and that the defect caused your injury. The manufacturer's care, testing, or intentions are legally irrelevant.

At Louis Berk Law, we represent Central Florida residents injured by defective vehicles, consumer products, tools, medical devices, and equipment. We investigate the full chain of distribution, identify every liable party, and build cases against manufacturers who routinely have far more resources and far more experience defending these claims than any individual plaintiff.

What Is Product Liability Under Florida Law?

Product liability is the legal responsibility a manufacturer, distributor, or retailer holds when a defective product causes injury, regardless of whether the company acted negligently. Florida recognizes three distinct types of product defects, and identifying which type applies to your case shapes the entire legal strategy.

A manufacturing defect occurs when a product deviates from its intended design during production, an individual unit that came off the assembly line different, and more dangerous, than the design specified. A design defect exists when the product's design itself is unreasonably dangerous, even when manufactured exactly as intended, meaning every unit of that product carries the same risk. A failure to warn defect, sometimes called a marketing defect, occurs when a product lacks adequate instructions or warnings about a non-obvious risk associated with its normal or foreseeable use.

Why Strict Liability Changes the Entire Case

Under strict liability, you do not have to prove the manufacturer knew about the defect, tested the product inadequately, or acted unreasonably in any way. You only have to establish that the product was in a defective, unreasonably dangerous condition when it left the manufacturer's control, and that the defect proximately caused your damages.

This matters enormously in practice. A manufacturer can argue it followed every industry standard, passed every internal safety test, and had no way of knowing about a defect, and still be held liable if the product was, in fact, defective and caused injury. Attorney Louis Berk has evaluated cases where a manufacturer's own internal testing documentation became key evidence, not because it proved negligence, but because it helped establish the specific defective condition that caused the injury.

Who Can Be Held Liable in a Florida Product Liability Case

Florida's stream of commerce doctrine allows an injured person to pursue any party in the chain of distribution that placed the defective product into the marketplace. This can include the manufacturer of the finished product, the manufacturer of a defective component part, the distributor or wholesaler, and the retailer that sold the product to the consumer.

Identifying every liable party matters because manufacturers frequently carry substantially more insurance coverage than retailers, and a component manufacturer may bear primary responsibility even when the finished product carries a different company's name. Our team traces the full supply chain behind a defective product, from the retailer where it was purchased back to the specific manufacturing facility responsible for the defect. In cases involving imported products or components manufactured overseas, this investigation can also extend to identifying the U.S.-based importer or distributor who placed the product into the domestic stream of commerce, since that party can often be held liable even when the original overseas manufacturer is difficult to reach in a U.S. court.

Florida's Statute of Limitations vs. Statute of Repose for Product Claims

Product liability claims in Florida operate under two separate and easily confused deadlines, and missing either one permanently bars recovery regardless of how strong the case is.

The statute of limitations under §95.11(3)(e) gives you four years from the date of injury, or from when the injury was discovered or should have been discovered, to file a product liability claim. This is a longer window than the two-year deadline HB 837 established for general negligence claims, since product liability actions were carved out separately in Florida's statutory scheme.

The statute of repose under §95.031(2)(b) sets an absolute outer deadline based on the age of the product itself, not the date of injury. Most products carry a presumed "expected useful life" of 10 years, and Florida bars product liability claims 12 years after the product was first delivered to its initial purchaser, regardless of when the injury occurred. A narrow set of products, commercial aircraft, trains, and vessels over 100 tons, receive a 20-year expected useful life instead of the default 10 years. This means a defective product that injures someone 13 years after it was first sold can be entirely outside the legal window, even though the four-year injury-based clock would not have started running until the injury happened.

Two exceptions can extend the repose period: if the manufacturer knew about and concealed the defect, or if the injury was caused by exposure to the defect within the 12-year window but did not manifest, or could not reasonably have been discovered, until after the repose period expired. Because this interaction between the two deadlines is genuinely complicated, and because Florida courts enforce the repose period strictly, evaluating a potential product liability claim promptly is essential, especially for products that have been in use for many years.

What Product Liability Claims Are Typically Worth

‍

These ranges reflect real outcomes. Our team obtained $1,400,000 for a driver who sustained severe facial fractures, orbital trauma, and a traumatic brain injury when a defective steering wheel airbag failed to deploy during a moderate-speed front-end collision in Orange County, and secured $680,000 for an Orlando homeowner who sustained multiple lumbar vertebrae fractures requiring spinal fusion surgery after a newly purchased aluminum stepladder suffered a catastrophic hinge lock failure during routine home maintenance.

Common Defective Products Behind Central Florida Injury Claims

Certain categories of defective products account for a large share of Florida product liability claims, and each carries its own investigation approach.

Automotive safety components, airbags, seatbelts, tire assemblies, and brake systems, can transform a survivable crash into a catastrophic one when they fail to perform as designed. These cases often overlap with an underlying car accident claim, requiring careful analysis of whether the crash itself, the vehicle's defective component, or both contributed to the injury.

Power tools and consumer electronics, particularly those with lithium-ion battery components, carry meaningful fire and explosion risk when manufactured with defective battery cells or inadequate thermal protection. These claims often involve both the battery manufacturer and the tool manufacturer as separate, independently liable parties. Our team secured $550,000 for an Orlando tradesman who suffered severe second- and third-degree chemical burns alongside permanent hand scarring when a commercially manufactured lithium-ion power tool battery exploded during standard operation.

Household and kitchen appliances, pressure cookers, water heaters, and similar products, can cause severe burn injuries when safety mechanisms like pressure release valves or lid locks fail under normal use. We recovered $375,000 for a consumer who suffered extensive scalding burns across the chest and arms after a defective lid lock mechanism on an electric pressure cooker failed, causing pressurized boiling liquids to discharge without warning.

Ladders and home maintenance equipment frequently fail at structural connection points, hinges, locking mechanisms, and rung attachments, causing falls that produce spinal and orthopedic injuries disproportionate to what a properly functioning product would allow.

Medical devices and implants, including joint replacement components, can fail years after implantation due to manufacturing defects in the materials used, sometimes requiring complete revision surgery to correct. Our team secured $290,000 for a Central Florida patient who experienced severe metallosis, tissue degradation, and early component loosening requiring complete revision surgery due to a manufacturing defect in an artificial knee implant system.

How Product Recalls Affect Your Claim

A product recall, whether issued voluntarily by the manufacturer or ordered by a federal agency like the Consumer Product Safety Commission or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, can significantly strengthen a product liability claim even when it does not decide the case outright. A recall notice covering the exact defect that caused your injury is powerful evidence that the manufacturer knew, or should have known, about the dangerous condition.

An injury that occurs before a recall is issued does not prevent you from bringing a claim, and a recall issued after your injury can still support the case by confirming the defect existed. Checking whether a product has been recalled, and preserving any recall notice you may have received or that applies to your specific product, is a useful early step in evaluating a potential claim. If the defective product caused a death rather than an injury, the estate's personal representative can pursue a wrongful death claim against the same liable parties.

Punitive Damages in Florida Product Liability Cases

Florida law allows punitive damages in product liability cases when the injured person can show the manufacturer engaged in conduct demonstrating intentional misconduct or gross negligence, a standard higher than what strict liability itself requires. Evidence supporting punitive damages often includes internal company documents showing the manufacturer knew about a defect and continued selling the product without adequately warning consumers or issuing a recall.

Because punitive damages require this heightened showing, and because Florida imposes procedural requirements before a punitive damages claim can even be pled, these claims require careful early investigation into what the manufacturer knew and when. Not every defective product case supports punitive damages, but when internal corporate knowledge of a defect can be established, it can substantially increase the case's overall value beyond compensatory damages alone.

Individual Claim vs. Class Action: Which Applies to You

When a defective product injures many consumers in similar ways, a class action lawsuit sometimes exists covering that specific product and defect. Joining a class action is not always the best path for someone with a serious personal injury, however, since class action settlements typically distribute a fixed, often modest amount per claimant regardless of how severe any individual person's injury was.

An individual product liability claim, pursued separately from any existing class action, allows the specific facts of your injury, your medical treatment, your lost wages, and your pain and suffering, to be valued on their own merits rather than averaged across a large class of claimants with widely varying injuries. For anyone who suffered a significant injury from a defective product, evaluating whether an individual claim would produce a substantially better outcome than participating in an existing class action is an important early decision, and it is one worth making before any class action settlement deadline passes.

Why Expert Witnesses Are Central to Product Liability Cases

Product liability cases depend heavily on expert testimony in a way that distinguishes them from many other personal injury claims. An engineering expert typically examines the product itself to identify the specific defect, whether in design, manufacturing, or the adequacy of warnings, and can testify to how a properly designed or manufactured version of the product would have prevented the injury.

Depending on the product involved, additional experts may be needed: a metallurgist for a structural failure, a biomedical engineer for a defective medical device, or a battery chemistry specialist for a lithium-ion failure case. Securing the right expert early, before the product can be lost, altered, or further damaged, is often what determines whether a product liability claim can be proven at all. This is part of why preserving the defective product immediately after an injury matters so much, since without the physical evidence, even the most qualified expert has nothing to examine.

How Manufacturers Defend Product Liability Claims

Manufacturers and their insurers raise a consistent set of defenses in Florida product liability cases. Product misuse argues the injured person used the product in a way not intended or reasonably foreseeable by the manufacturer, shifting responsibility away from the product's design. Substantial modification argues a third party altered the product after it left the manufacturer's control, breaking the chain of liability. State of the art defense argues the design reflected the best available technology and industry standards at the time of manufacture, though under strict liability, this defense carries less weight than it would in a pure negligence claim, since strict liability does not depend on whether the manufacturer's conduct was reasonable.

Comparative fault can also reduce recovery in cases involving both a negligence and strict liability theory, similar to how §768.81 applies in other Florida injury claims, though how comparative fault interacts with a pure strict liability count depends on the specific facts and claims pled in the case.

What to Do If You Were Injured by a Defective Product

1. Preserve the product itself. Do not repair, discard, or return the defective product. The physical product is often the single most important piece of evidence in the case.
2. Photograph the product and the injury. Document the product's condition, any visible defect, packaging, and instructions exactly as they existed at the time of the injury.
3. Seek medical care and follow through on treatment. A complete medical record connects the injury directly to the product defect.
4. Keep the purchase receipt or any proof of purchase date. This becomes critical for establishing where the injury falls relative to the statute of repose.
5. Avoid speaking with the manufacturer's representatives before consulting an attorney. Manufacturers sometimes contact injured consumers directly to gather statements that later undermine the claim.

For a broader look at how the settlement process works from claim to payout, see our guide on personal injury settlements in Florida.

How Louis Berk Law Handles Product Liability Cases

When we take on a product liability case, we secure and preserve the defective product immediately, often retaining an engineering or safety expert to examine it before any further deterioration or loss of evidence. We investigate the full chain of distribution to identify every liable party, review the product's design and manufacturing history where available through discovery, and calculate the full value of the claim, including future medical costs for injuries requiring ongoing treatment or revision surgery.

We have handled product liability claims throughout Central Florida involving defective vehicle safety components, power tools, consumer appliances, and medical devices, and we understand how to build a case against manufacturers who have significantly more resources and experience defending these claims than any individual consumer. Whether the injury involves a single defective unit or points to a broader pattern affecting many consumers, we evaluate the full picture, including whether a recall, a pending class action, or other litigation already exists involving the same product, before recommending the path most likely to secure the full compensation your case deserves. You can review our case results to see how we have approached similar cases.

Disclaimer: This page is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is different. For advice about your specific situation, contact a licensed attorney. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.