FREE CASE CONSULTATION
312-622-2900
Facebook-f Linkedin Google Instagram

Products Liability Attorney in Auburn Gresham

Let Carlson Bier Fight For You

Over $50 Million in Recoveries

5-Star Advanced Local Service Ads For Carlson Bier
Find Out if You Have a Case in 10 Seconds
Jeff Bier – Personal Injury Lawyer At Carlson Bier Associates
Personal Injury Lawyer Orland Park Illinois | Carlson Bier Associates

About Carlson Bier Associates

When dealing with a products liability case in Auburn Gresham, the counsel of an astute and experienced attorney is paramount. At Carlson Bier, we specialize in representing clients who have been adversely impacted by defective or unsafe products. Our firm’s deep understanding of Illinois law allows us to confront manufacturers or distributors vigorously and effectively. We have a proven record of securing favorable outcomes for our clients through meticulous investigation, solid preparation, strategic negotiation and commanding courtroom presence when necessary. What differentiates us from others? It’s our commitment – serving every client with unwavering dedication while ensuring that their rights are safeguarded against formidable adversaries. At Carlson Bier, we understand the intricacies of product liability laws like no other; it isn’t just about winning cases but restoring hope and normalcy back into your life after enduring trauma caused by unsafe products. Choosing Carlson Bier means entrusting your case to proficient attorneys who regard your recovery as their primary mission.

Meet Our Attorneys
About Carlson Bier

Products Liability Lawyers in Auburn Gresham Illinois

Welcome to the informative hub of Carlson Bier, your trusted legal companion in personal injury cases predominant in Illinois. Our specializing sphere is ‘Products Liability,’ where we excel by bringing justice to affected individuals through our comprehensive knowledge and experience. Product liability law denotes manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, and retailers’ responsibility when their products cause harm to consumers due to defectiveness or negligence during manufacturing.

Commanding a strong grasp on Products Liability, we regularly deal with three critical types of product defects – design defects occurring before the product is manufactured; manufacturing defects occurring during the production process; and marketing defects—such as improper labeling or inadequately detailed instructions—that typically result in user’s misuse of the product. Understanding these variations are crucial for discerning liability.

While placing emphasis on matters concerning faulty goods and consequent injuries:

• Product Design Defects: Stem from intrinsic flaws at the designing phase prior to manufacturing.

• Manufacturing Defects: Are errors realized post-production that could turn a safe product into an unsafe one.

• Marketing Defects: Occur when end consumers aren’t adequately informed about potentially hazardous elements associated with using the product.

Each day some unfortunate event happens where someone gets injured, thanks mainly due to defective products. But how do you determine whether you have a valid Products Liability claim? There are typically four things our experienced attorneys look for:

– The presence of an injury or loss (incurring medical costs or lost wages)

– Proof that the product was indeed defective

– Evidence proving that this defect directly caused your injuries

– Demonstration that you were using the product as intended

Navigating areas of complex laws surrounding consumer products isn’t easy – evidencing tangible links between your incurred injuries and any related products can be clouded with hurdles requiring specialized assistance. In fact, Illinois being governed under both strict liability rules & negligence-based claims demands honed expertise like ours!

Our protagonist role extends beyond merely representing affected individuals in court. We cherish an informed community, thus we continuously shed light on various laws and rights surrounding Products Liability claims so you can take preventive measures or promptly recognize a potential claim.

Should matters escalate to litigation, know that the statute of limitations for Product Liability claims in Illinois is two years from the date of injury discovery. Meeting this window could potentially make a significant difference to your case. And it’s exactly why at Carlson Bier, speedy consultations and clear communication form our customer service bedrock.

Your encounter with faulty products may have left you distressed physically, mentally & financially; but remember that Carlson Bier remains steadfast to guide and represent you along this disarrayed path towards seeking justice!

Perhaps one pertinent question still lingers: “Can anyone out there truly understand my suffering?” With empathy being our practice bedrock, pairing with us will bring forth reassuring affirmative answer! Driven by ‘Bringing Value,’ each interaction weaves together bits n pieces into a cohesive dossier aiming at getting your life back onto the recovery route – post any catastrophic product liability mishap!

Why choose us? Well, our ethos of delivering insightful information while simultaneously dealing tirelessly with these legal complexities sets us apart. As passionate champions for victims of defective products, we stay ahead through constant learning coupled with decades-long experience fostering confidence in clients who entrust their fate upon us.

Intrigued much already about how much your products liability case might fetch you? Don’t allow anxiety grips hinder proactive actions. For remember: The longer you wait, lower becomes restitution chance as evidence may deteriorate or vanish completely!

With above insights seeped into mind frame now is just the right time to move forth by taking decisive action! Drop inhibitions holding back free consultation advantages – available only a click away! Go ahead; press the button below to obtain no-obligation evaluation underscoring potential worthiness encompassing your rightful claim today!

Find Out How Much Your Case is Worth
Testimonials from Clients

Your Success Is Our Success

Notable Illinois Appellate Wins

Moruzzi v. CCC Servs., Inc., 2020 IL App (2d) 190411, 171 N.E.3d 61
Background: Insured motorist filed action against insurer for declaratory judgment seeking construction of automobile insurance policy issued to insured and that was in effect when insured was injured by an underinsured driver. The Circuit Court, DuPage County, Bonnie M. Wheaton, J., granted the insurer's motions for summary judgment. Insured appealed.Holdings: The Appellate Court, Zenoff, J., held that:1 medical payments reduction clause in automobile insurance policy conflicted with underinsured motorist provisions so as to render reduction clause ambiguous, and thus medical payment benefits were deductible from insured's damages;2 law firm representing insured did not create common fund or common funds when it reached settlement with underinsured motorist, and thus law firm was not entitled to recover fees under common-fund doctrine; and3 collateral estoppel did not bar automobile insurers from litigating whether common-fund doctrine applied in insured motorist's declaratory judgment action.Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Maier v. CC Servs., Inc., 2019 IL App (3d) 170640, 132 N.E.3d 795
Background: After insured, who was injured in automobile collision with another driver, recovered full liability limits of driver's policy, she filed amended complaint for declaratory judgment against her own automobile insurer, alleging that insurer breached contractual duty to pay for insured's damages in accordance with uninsured/underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in insured's policy and that insurer acted in bad faith in denying insured such coverage. The Circuit Court, La Salle County, Troy D. Holland, J., granted the insurer's motion to dismiss claims as time-barred. Insured appealed.The Appellate Court ruled that neither the insurer nor the insured could add amended policy provisions to the court record. It was decided that the policy's requirement for a written arbitration demand applied to both uninsured and underinsured motorist claims. The court found that a letter from the insured's attorney to the insurer wasn't a valid arbitration demand nor a proof of loss to toll the statute of limitations. Finally, the insurer was permitted to use the defense based on the two-year statute of limitations period. The court's decision was affirmed.
Econ. Premier Assurance Co. v. Country Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 IL App (1st) 192364-U
Holding: The circuit court's order that granted defendant's motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment was proper where defendant had no duty to indemnify its insured with respect to the underlying complaint and therefore plaintiff was not entitled to recover against defendant on its subrogation or unjust enrichment claims; affirmed.
Country Preferred Ins. Co. v. Westerheide, 2023 IL App (5th) 220343-U
Holding: The court affirmed judgment of the circuit court granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff where the defendant failed to make a written demand for arbitration within two years from the date of the accident as required by the underinsured provisions of the defendant's automotive insurance policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Olsak, 2022 IL App (1st) 200695, 216 N.E.3d 291
In a complex legal case, an insurer sought to avoid defending or indemnifying a hockey player under a policy issued to the player's stepfather after the player was sued for assaulting his coach. The initial Circuit Court ruling favored the insurer, but the Appellate Court reversed this decision, leading to a protracted legal battle. Ultimately, the Appellate Court determined the insurer was liable only up to the $3 million policy limit and found the insurer's four-year delay in seeking a declaratory judgment to be reasonable. This case highlights important aspects of insurance litigation and policy limit liabilities.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Durkin Elec. Co., Inc., 2022 IL App (1st) 210293-U, appeal denied, 199 N.E.3d 1187 (Ill. 2022)
Holding: The circuit court's order that denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment and found that defendant was an additional insured under the policy was proper. The circuit court's order that denied defendant's motion for summary judgment and found that plaintiff did not have a duty to defend or indemnify defendant under the policy was proper; affirmed.
Country Preferred Ins. Co. v. Groen, 2017 IL App (4th) 160028, 69 N.E.3d 911
Background: Uninsured motorist (UM) carrier brought action against insured for declaratory judgment that it owed no benefits since workers' compensation received by insured exceeded policy limits. The Circuit Court, Sangamon County, Chris Perrin, J., entered summary judgment in favor of the carrier. Insured appealed.Holdings: The Appellate Court, Harris, J., held that:1 employer's medical payments entitled carrier to setoff, and2 setoff clauses were enforceable.Affirmed.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Frobish, 2021 IL App (3d) 190473-U
Holding: Allegations in the underlying complaint that a township employee caused property damage by excavating and digging out a ditch failed to impose a duty to defend under township employee's individual farm insurance policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Jones, 2018 IL App (1st) 173154-U
Holding: The judgment of the circuit court of Cook County is affirmed; plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against the underlying complaint because the loss claimed in the underlying complaint is subject to an exclusion. The court held that it would also enter judgment for plaintiff because the underlying complaint does not allege an “occurrence” causing bodily injury within the meaning of the policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Schmitt, 2021 IL App (5th) 190173-U
Holding: The appellate court reversed and remanded the judgment of the circuit court where plaintiff had no duty to defend its insured and thus was not stopped from raising policy defenses to coverage for the underlying tort action contained in the amended declaratory action.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Livorsi Marine, Inc., 222 Ill. 2d 303, 856 N.E.2d 338 (2006) (the late Keith Carlson)
Liability insurer brought action against insureds for a declaratory judgment based on failure to provide timely notice of lawsuits against them. The Circuit Court, Cook County, Stephen A. Schiller, J., entered judgment for the insurer. Insureds appealed. The Appellate Court, Wolfson, J., 358 Ill.App.3d 880, 295 Ill.Dec. 665, 833 N.E.2d 871, affirmed. Leave to appeal was granted.Holdings: The Supreme Court, Garman, J., held that:1 if the insurer did not receive reasonable notice of an occurrence or a lawsuit, the policyholder may not recover under the policy, regardless of whether the lack of reasonable notice prejudiced the insurer, overruling Rice v. AAA Aerostar, Inc., 294 Ill.App.3d 801, 229 Ill.Dec. 20, 690 N.E.2d 1067, and Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Baur's Opera House, Inc., 296 Ill.App.3d 1011, 230 Ill.Dec. 624, 694 N.E.2d 593, and2 insured did not need to prove that it was prejudiced by delayed notice of lawsuits.Affirmed.
Education & Information

Resources For Auburn Gresham Residents

Links

Legal Associations and Lawyer Services

Online Legal Resources and Directories

Specialized Services and Educational Resources

Legal Blogs
SEE MORE

Frequently Asked Questions

Product Liability FAQ​

Product liability is the legal responsibility of manufacturers, distributors, sellers, and suppliers for injuries caused by defective products.

The three main types of product liability claims are:

  • Manufacturing defects: These defects occur during the manufacturing process and cause the product to be unsafe.
  • Design defects: These defects exist in the design of the product and make it inherently unsafe.
  • Marketing defects: These defects occur when the manufacturer or seller fails to adequately warn consumers about the dangers of the product.

The signs and symptoms of a product liability injury can vary depending on the type of product that caused the injury. However, some common signs and symptoms include:

  • Physical injuries: These could include cuts, bruises, burns, fractures, and other injuries.
  • Property damage: This could include damage to your home, car, or other belongings.
  • Economic losses: These could include lost wages, medical expenses, and other financial losses.

The treatment options for product liability injuries will vary depending on the severity of the injuries. However, some common treatment options include:

  • Surgery: Surgery may be required to repair injuries that were caused by a defective product.
  • Physical therapy: Physical therapy may be required to help patients regain their strength and mobility after suffering an injury.
  • Occupational therapy: Occupational therapy may be required to help patients learn to perform activities of daily living after suffering an injury.
  • Medications: Medications may be required to treat pain and other symptoms of product liability injuries.

Yes, you may be able to file a lawsuit for a product liability injury if you have been injured due to a defective product. A product liability lawyer can help you understand your rights and options, and can represent you in court if necessary.

All Attorney Services in Auburn Gresham

Areas of Practice in Auburn Gresham

Bicycle Accidents

Expert in legal assistance for victims injured in bicycle accidents due to negligent parties' negligence or dangerous conditions.

Scald Wounds

Giving professional legal advice for patients of major burn injuries caused by events or carelessness.

Medical Malpractice

Ensuring expert legal advice for patients affected by clinical malpractice, including medication mistakes.

Goods Accountability

Addressing cases involving defective products, offering specialist legal support to clients affected by faulty goods.

Senior Misconduct

Protecting the rights of the elderly who have been subjected to misconduct in aged care environments, ensuring restitution.

Slip and Fall Accidents

Skilled in tackling slip and fall accident cases, providing legal representation to victims seeking compensation for their harm.

Birth Traumas

Providing legal help for kin affected by medical misconduct resulting in birth injuries.

Vehicle Accidents

Accidents: Committed to supporting victims of car accidents receive equitable recompense for damages and harm.

Two-Wheeler Accidents

Focused on providing representation for victims involved in scooter accidents, ensuring just recovery for injuries.

Trucking Accident

Offering specialist legal support for victims involved in truck accidents, focusing on securing adequate compensation for harms.

Construction Site Collisions

Engaged in advocating for staff or bystanders injured in construction site accidents due to carelessness or irresponsibility.

Neurological Injuries

Focused on ensuring professional legal services for persons suffering from cerebral injuries due to misconduct.

K9 Assault Harms

Expertise in tackling cases for persons who have suffered damages from dog attacks or wildlife encounters.

Cross-walker Mishaps

Dedicated to legal advocacy for cross-walkers involved in accidents, providing expert advice for recovering restitution.

Unfair Death

Standing up for relatives affected by a wrongful death, delivering empathetic and skilled legal support to ensure fairness.

Neural Trauma

Expert in advocating for persons with backbone trauma, offering expert legal guidance to secure settlement.

Instant Case Evaluation

Contact Us Today if you need a Person Injury Lawyer

312-313-2440