The Modern Firm Website Analytics

Providing legal expertise to our clients, nationwide

Product Liability Defense

No matter how much time, money and innovation is put into designing and manufacturing a product, the unfortunate can occur and that product can become the subject of a lawsuit. Companies can expend considerable time, effort and resources in designing safety features, only to be sued when those features do not protect against an inconceivable injury.

The attorneys at Setliff Law have handled all types of product liability matters in state and federal court. We utilize our insight into the scientific, engineering, and medical fields to efficiently manage the unique and complicated issues associated with product liability litigation. We aggressively defend our clients through thorough discovery, dispositive pre-trial motions, procedural and evidentiary motions and techniques, and experienced trial practice.

Understanding the potential ramifications for future lawsuits and bad publicity, our attorneys formulate a litigation strategy that incorporates the present case with the business and litigation needs of the client. We understand that trying a product liability case is a joint effort with our client, and we keep the client informed of the status of the case and any developments. Our experience, knowledge and understanding of your business can make the inevitable product liability suit easier to handle.

The following are some of our attorneys’ representative engagements:

» Representation of manufacturers that produce asbestos-containing products against claims that the plaintiffs’ exposure to those products resulted in contraction of mesothelioma and other respiratory ailments.

» Lead Virginia trial counsel for pharmaceutical company in herbal supplement litigation involving alleged physical and psychological injuries resulting from use of ephedra/ephedrine.

» Representation of a pharmaceutical company in the diet drug mass tort litigation.

» Representation of a pharmaceutical company whose product allegedly caused severe involuntary motor movements in the plaintiff.