Contributory negligence in Columbia product liability cases can threaten your compensation. You bought a product, and it hurt you, and now the manufacturer is pointing the finger back at you.
South Carolina follows a modified comparative negligence rule with a 51% bar. If a jury finds you 51% or more at fault, you recover nothing, even if the product was clearly defective.
Protect your rights with an experienced product liability attorney from WPF Law in product liability cases. Let our experienced product liability attorneys seek the compensation you deserve.
How Contributory Negligence Works in Product Cases
Pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15, most product liability claims do not involve clear or intentional misuse. They often stem from normal use with slight deviations. For instance, someone may overlook a warning label or make a small modification to the product. These actions could allow the defense to raise contributory negligence arguments.
Defense attorneys often rely on this strategy. They examine your deposition carefully for any indication that you did not follow the product instructions exactly as written. They may point to a single sentence in the manual that you overlooked. They will emphasize every small decision you made that could be framed as contributing to the incident.
The central issue is whether your actions were reasonable under the circumstances. For example, a homeowner who operates a lawnmower without safety goggles may be considered careless. However, a parent who did not read the forty-seventh page of a lengthy car seat manual is likely acting in a manner that many reasonable people would share.
Common Contributory Negligence Arguments
Product manufacturers commonly raise several defenses in these cases. They may assert that the product was used in a manner that was not reasonably foreseeable. They may argue that you disregarded clear warnings or that you altered or modified the product after purchase. They may also contend that you failed to maintain the product in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Each defense requires careful, fact-specific analysis. Unforeseeable misuse sets a high threshold. Manufacturers must anticipate reasonably foreseeable uses, including improper ones. If a particular use by teenagers is common, that use is reasonably foreseeable..
Warning labels introduce additional considerations, as courts evaluate whether the warnings were adequate, conspicuous, and clear. A small warning embedded in dense text carries little weight. The same is true for a warning provided only in English when the product is marketed primarily to Spanish-speaking consumers.
Protecting Your Claim
Documentation is critical. Photograph the product immediately after the injury. Preserve all packaging, instructions, and receipts. Record a detailed account of the incident while the memory remains clear.
Do not provide recorded statements to insurance adjusters without legal counsel. Adjusters are trained to elicit statements that can be characterized as contributory negligence. A casual remark such as “I suppose I should have been more careful” may be used as evidence to shift responsibility onto you.
Social media activity can significantly undermine your case. A video of you engaging in a high-risk activity months before the incident may be used by defense counsel to suggest a pattern of reckless behavior. A casual post joking about not reading instructions may be presented as evidence supporting a contributory negligence argument.
Why You Need Experienced Representation
Our firm understands how to respond to contributory negligence allegations. We conduct a thorough investigation to demonstrate that the product defect was the primary cause of the injury. We work with qualified experts who can explain why your actions were reasonable under the circumstances. We also prepare you carefully for deposition to help ensure that you do not make statements that could be interpreted as accepting undue fault.
WPF Law also recognizes when it is necessary to challenge unfair characterizations of your conduct. Manufacturers may attempt to reframe ordinary behavior as negligent. For example, using a space heater near curtains is not negligent if the heater should have incorporated adequate safety features. Likewise, running in athletic shoes is not a misuse if the sole detaches during normal use.
The defense will make significant efforts to shift responsibility onto you. They often have substantial resources and experienced counsel. You deserve a legal team that advocates just as strongly to protect your rights.
Speak with an Attorney About How Contributory Negligence Could Affect Your Product Liability Case in Columbia.
Contributory negligence in Columbia product liability cases needs careful attention from the start. Waiting makes it harder to collect proof that shows you acted responsibly. Insurance companies begin defending themselves right away, and you need to act too.
At WPF Law, we assess your case, explain your rights, and plan the best way to protect your claim. Don’t let a manufacturer shift blame for their unsafe product.
Contact us today.
