What is product liability? Theory of law intended to allow remedy for injuries covered by defective products.
Possibly no area of trial practice is the subject of more theory and speculation than jury selection. Many trial lawyers will agree that jury selection is the most important part of a trial. To go one step further, many trial attorneys will also agree that a great number of cases are won at jury selection. As a result, a case may be won or lost by the time the jury has been seated in the jury box.
According to the National Transportation Safety Association (NHTSA), an average of 7,492 people are killed and 9,211 people each year are seriously injured due to complete or partial ejection through inadquetly glazed windows.1 Advance window glazing is a genetic term used to describe numerous methods used to ensure window strength is sufficient to prevent occupant ejection in vehicles. Advanced glazing in the right and front side windows could save an estimated 1,313 lives and prevent 1,297 serious injuries each year.2 Statistics such as these prompted the NHTSA to conduct research on the potential safety advantages of utilizing advanced glazing materials in front windshields.
What is product liability? A theory of law intended to allow a remedy for injuries caused by defective products.
A plaintiff’s attorney in a medical malpractice action against a nursing home faces several obstacles that must be overcome in the prosecution of the case on behalf of the client. These obstacles were established by certain “tort reform” legislation which placed significant limitations on the substantive and procedural rights of plaintiffs who pursue nursing home malpractice cases.
A toxic tort is a civil wrong arising from exposure to a toxic substance.4 Litigating such a case can be intimidating, because of the complex issues involved. Notwithstanding these highly technical issues, toxic tort cases contain themes that can be clear and understandable. Thus, to be effective, counsel should try to frame the debate in terms of these simple issues, to avoid overwhelming and confusing the jury. Lawyer Allan Kanner offers an analogy. On one hand, toxic tort lawyers are builders, compiling information to construct a case. On the other hand, they are sculptors, chipping away extraneous information that clouds the argument. “The key is to find the perfect balance between information and presentability.”
Traditionally, class action certification decisions are reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard, with no distinction being made between decisions that grant certification and those that deny it. The thresholds that must be met in seeking certification of a class action are numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation. Alabama classes are codified for certification purposes at Ala. Code §6-5- 641.
Even more so than with individual cases, most class actions settle. This is due in part to the fact that the risks of proceeding to judgment post-certification are very significant to all parties. However, many settlements are often negotiated prior to certification. In those cases, the settlement is contingent on the court certifying a class for settlement purposes only.
Recently, our United States Supreme Court dealt a serious blow to public safety. The Court held that as long as federal funds have been used to install warning devices at railroad crossings (no matter how inadequate or unsafe), then a victim who has been struck by a train is left without a remedy against the railroad. Federal Funds are now used at most crossings on public roads. This ruling effects the safety of all of us and our families.
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration was concerned with the lack of use of seatbelt systems in passenger cars.


