In Georgia, product liability cases bring justice to people injured by defective or dangerous products. These cases help individuals seek compensation for injuries caused by products that fail to meet safety standards. When a person is hurt due to a product’s design, manufacturing flaws, or lack of warning labels, they can file a product liability claim to hold the manufacturer or seller accountable. However, not all cases result in compensation for the injured party. Sometimes, manufacturers or sellers use defenses to argue they should not be responsible for an injury. One of the defenses they may use is called “assumption of risk.” This defense is based on the idea that the person who got hurt understood and accepted the risks involved when using the product, which can complicate the outcome of a claim. In Georgia, understanding how assumption of risk is used as a defense in product liability cases is key for those injured by defective products to know their rights and limitations. At, Keenan Law Firm, we are here to guide you through the legal process and help you navigate the complexities of your case.
Understanding Assumption of Risk
The concept of assumption of risk is based on the idea that people sometimes willingly take on known dangers. In legal terms, it means that a person knew there was a risk involved in an activity or with a product, and they chose to proceed anyway. By deciding to go ahead despite knowing the possible dangers, the person may limit their ability to hold another party responsible for any resulting injuries. In product liability cases, a company or manufacturer can claim that a person assumed the risk when they used a product, even if it caused them harm. For example, if someone uses a product that clearly states it has a hazard but decides to ignore the warning, the company might argue that the person took on the risk. This defense can impact whether an injured person can receive compensation because it suggests they were aware of the potential for harm.
How Assumption of Risk Defense is Used in Georgia
In Georgia, the assumption of risk defense is not always easy to prove. To use it in a product liability case, the manufacturer or seller must show clear evidence that the injured person knew about the risks and accepted them voluntarily. It is not enough to simply argue that a person should have known the risks; the defense must demonstrate that the person actually did know about them and chose to proceed. This can include showing that the product came with warnings or that the person had prior experience with similar risks. For instance, if a person uses a heavy-duty power tool that comes with a label warning of possible injuries and then gets hurt while ignoring the instructions, the company might argue that the person assumed the risk. Georgia law requires proof that the injured party had a complete understanding of the risks involved and used the product anyway.
Types of Assumption of Risk in Product Liability Cases
Assumption of risk in Georgia product liability cases can fall into two types: express assumption of risk and implied assumption of risk. Express assumption of risk happens when a person knowingly agrees to take on the dangers associated with a product. This often involves written agreements, such as signing a waiver before using the product, that specifically mentions the potential hazards. For example, if someone signs a document acknowledging the risks of using a particular product and then gets injured, this could be seen as an express assumption of risk, as they clearly agreed to the terms before using it.
Matthew Powell
Katherine Rinaldo
Don Truskett
Michael Strong
On the other hand, implied assumption of risk is more complex and involves situations where the injured person’s actions show that they were aware of the risks but continued to use the product regardless. Unlike express assumption of risk, there may not be any written agreement in implied cases. Instead, it is based on the person’s behavior and circumstances. An example of implied assumption of risk is when someone uses a ladder that is visibly damaged. Even without a written warning, the visible damage serves as an obvious hazard. If the person uses it anyway, a court might see this as an implied assumption of risk because they went ahead with the action despite seeing the clear danger.
Challenges of Proving Assumption of Risk in Georgia
Using the assumption of risk as a defense in Georgia can be challenging because the court needs strong evidence that the injured party fully understood and accepted the danger. The law places a high burden of proof on the manufacturer or seller to show that the person made a knowledgeable choice to face the risk. It is not enough to assume that the person should have known about the risk; the evidence must prove they actually knew and accepted it. Courts often examine the warning labels on products, any instructions that came with the product, and the behavior of the injured person to determine if they knowingly took on the risk. For instance, if a product has a detailed warning label in plain language but the injured person ignores it, the court may be more likely to accept the assumption of risk defense. But if the warnings were unclear or hidden, it becomes harder for the company to argue that the person knowingly accepted the risk.
Verdicts & Settlements
Impact on Product Liability Cases
The assumption of risk defense can have a significant impact on the outcome of a product liability case. If the court accepts that the injured person knowingly took on the risk, it can reduce or even eliminate the compensation they receive. This defense can protect manufacturers and sellers from having to pay for injuries that, according to them, were caused by the person’s own decision to ignore warnings or instructions. However, the defense does not always lead to a win for the manufacturer. The court must carefully review whether the risk was clearly communicated and if the injured person fully understood it before the injury occurred. Assumption of risk does not excuse companies from their responsibility to make safe products and warn users of possible dangers. Instead, it only applies in cases where the court believes the injured person had clear knowledge and took on the risk willingly.
Comparative Negligence and Assumption of Risk in Georgia
In Georgia, product liability cases may involve a legal concept called comparative negligence. This concept means that if the injured person is partly at fault for their injuries, their compensation can be reduced based on their share of the blame. When assumption of risk is used in combination with comparative negligence, it can further affect the outcome of the case. For example, if a person is found to be 30% responsible for their own injuries due to assumption of risk, the court may reduce their compensation by 30%. In some cases, assumption of risk may completely prevent an injured person from recovering any damages, especially if the court finds that they were primarily responsible for their own injuries. Comparative negligence and assumption of risk work together in Georgia product liability cases to assign responsibility based on the actions of both the injured person and the manufacturer or seller.
Exceptions to Assumption of Risk
Not all product liability cases in Georgia allow assumption of risk as a defense. For example, if a product is defectively designed or lacks adequate warnings, the assumption of risk defense may not apply. Courts often hold companies to a high standard for making sure their products are safe and clearly labeled. If a product’s risks are not properly disclosed, the injured person cannot be expected to assume a risk they did not know about. This is especially true in cases involving complex or hidden defects, where the average person may not be able to recognize the danger. Courts may also consider the intended use of the product. If a product is used in the way it was designed and still causes harm, it can be hard for the manufacturer to claim assumption of risk. For instance, if a child’s toy has sharp edges that cause injuries despite proper use, the court might reject the assumption of risk defense.
Why Assumption of Risk Matters in Georgia Product Liability Cases
Assumption of risk plays an important role in Georgia product liability cases by helping balance responsibility between injured individuals and manufacturers. It helps the court decide if a person who was injured took reasonable steps to protect themselves from harm. If someone knowingly ignores safety instructions or warnings, the assumption of risk defense encourages personal accountability. This defense also helps companies avoid unfair blame for injuries that result from people’s choices rather than product defects. However, it does not take away the responsibility of manufacturers to make safe products and provide clear warnings. Assumption of risk serves as a reminder that both parties in a product liability case have responsibilities: manufacturers must create safe products and users must take care when using them.
If you or a loved one has been injured by a defective product in Georgia, understanding the role of assumption of risk is essential to knowing your rights. Keenan Law Firm is here to help you navigate these complex legal matters and protect your interests. Our team will analyze your case, review any defenses raised, and work hard to ensure you have the strongest possible case. Whether you are dealing with an assumption of risk defense or other challenging legal issues, we are ready to fight for the compensation you deserve. Contact Keenan Law Firm today to discuss your case and take the first step toward the justice and recovery you need.