Open AccessWould a Warning Have Prevented the Accident?
Author(s) -
Sheree Gibson-Harris
Publication year - 1986
Publication title -
journal of the national academy of forensic engineers
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.102
H-Index - 1
eISSN - 2379-3252
pISSN - 2379-3244
DOI - 10.51501/jotnafe.v3i2.407
Subject(s) - liability , business , tort , accident (philosophy) , product liability , product (mathematics) , liability insurance , quality (philosophy) , strict liability , risk analysis (engineering) , law and economics , economics , accounting , philosophy , epistemology , geometry , mathematics
After products liability tort reform has run its course, and the insurance crisis has been resolved, manufacturers will still be held responsible for defective products that fail prematurely causing injury, property damage and commercial loss. This products liability responsibility has two aspects which should be clearly distinguished by forensic engineers. The first, has little to do with recent developments in products liability law and simply involves a forensic engineers understanding of the more traditional factors that result in safe, quality products, through the establishment within the company of sound management, design and manufacturing practices. The second aspect of effective accident investigation, litigation or consulting with industry, demands an understanding of the concepts and trends in products liability case law as it relates to the product safety and liability responsibility of manufacturers. The following paper describes some of the concepts of products l