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

Products Liability Attorney in Cisne

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 it comes to selecting a reliable Products Liability attorney, Carlson Bier emerges as the top contender. Based in Illinois, our practice boasts an enviable track record of successfully managing cases related to faulty goods and improper labeling which have caused harm. We shed light on unexplored vulnerabilities, making us your resolution companion amidst chaotic legal endeavours. Our prowess lies in understanding the fine lines between product defect typologies – manufacturing errors or design faults under scrutiny till we extract truth for justice’s sake. Dedicated and seasoned experts await you at Carlson Bier; their impeccable wisdom orchestrating solutions epitomizes excellence beyond borders encompassing Cisne’s realm too. But our work ethics extend beyond mere professionalism; maintaining honesty throughout processes is paramount here at Carlson Bier thereby ensuring complete transparency about workspace locale adherence with respect to Illinois law stipulations regarding advertising norms specific to practicing city boundaries limitations.

Services dispatched by your trusted Product Liability counselor should never be impeded by geographic barriers, hence while no physical office prevails in Cisne we steadily impact its confines through invincible virtual services all within lawful parameters.

Meet Our Attorneys
About Carlson Bier

Products Liability Lawyers in Cisne Illinois

When it comes to product liability law, Carlson Bier’s team of experienced personal injury attorneys in Illinois is your most trusted choice. Our main goal is to ensure you understand the intricacies involved in such cases and are emboldened with knowledge enough for leveraging your legal rights.

Product liability claims arise from injuries sustained due to manufacturing defects, design flaws, or nondisclosure of risks concerning a product on the market. If you have suffered an injury attributed to any of these circumstances, then you fall under products’ liability.

Here we elucidate what our adept legal professionals can provide:

• Meticulous Case Examination: We delve into the specifics of every claim brought before us – deciphering complications, considering all applicable laws and regulations, identifying liable parties – ensuring the strongest possible case on your behalf.

• Extensive Experience: With our proven track record in cases encompassing defective medical devices, flawed auto parts, children’s toys, household appliances among others – we offer expert proficiency that ensures optimal outcomes.

• Champion Advocacy: From initial consultation through final resolution – proactive advocacy remains at the forefront of our efforts.

• Negotiation & Settlement Expertise: Unrivaled acumen in negotiations sets us apart. Plus when viable settlements evade reach – be assured; our lawyers possess extensive litigation experience necessary for pursuing trial.

When navigating this complex legal realm known as ‘product liability’, expert counsel proves invaluable. Often neglected but essential details regarding such events include statute limitations for filing lawsuits correlating with date of discovery instead of injury infliction times and Illinois applying modified comparative fault rule where you can recover damages only if less than 50% at fault.

Understanding how negligence applies within product liability context is essential too. Essentially it demands affirmation that duty was owed by defendant to plaintiff (you), this duty got breached leading to resultant harm inflicted upon plaintiff and causing damages subject lawsuit seeks compensation against.

Also important is understanding strict liabilities pertaining manufacturing defects – even without prior warning, manufacturers can be held responsible. It is because implied warranties regarding product safety and efficiency exist whereby breach of these warranties holds the manufacturer accountable.

Notably, such issues don’t merely dice for prospective plaintiffs but defendants too. Manufacturers might avail defense asserting plaintiff’s own negligence led to sustained injuries or defend against expired statutes of limitation evidencing late lawsuit filing.

At the Carlton Bier law firm – we appreciate how crucial identification and analysis of these key aspects are in securing successful outcomes in products liability cases. Above all else, our aim remains your utmost satisfaction and protection from potential travails by providing clear-cut explanations and pertinent advice augmented with legal prowess spanning decades.

In conclusion, unresolved questions surrounding a defective product injury could cause undue stress; it’s not something one should face alone. You deserve understanding of expected legal journey ahead and vital peace-of-mind throughout process ensuring vindication rights aren’t compromised. At Carlson Bier, it’s not just about winning lawsuits but caring attorney-client relationships assuring you aren’t alone facing this challenge.

Confused about what your case could potentially yield? Don’t solely base decisions on guesswork when professional help is readily available at click distance away! Use our simple initial evaluation tool below to obtain an estimation enabling informed decision making concerning your claim’s worth and exploring suitable directions henceforth with our expert attorneys guiding each step along path toward recovery.

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 Cisne 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 Cisne

Areas of Practice in Cisne

Bike Mishaps

Focused on legal advocacy for individuals injured in bicycle accidents due to negligent parties' recklessness or dangerous conditions.

Burn Wounds

Providing skilled legal help for people of major burn injuries caused by incidents or indifference.

Medical Negligence

Delivering specialist legal representation for victims affected by medical malpractice, including surgical errors.

Products Responsibility

Managing cases involving unsafe products, delivering skilled legal guidance to clients affected by defective items.

Senior Mistreatment

Advocating for the rights of nursing home residents who have been subjected to malpractice in senior centers environments, ensuring compensation.

Slip & Trip Occurrences

Skilled in dealing with trip accident cases, providing legal representation to individuals seeking restitution for their harm.

Birth Damages

Delivering legal support for households affected by medical negligence resulting in birth injuries.

Vehicle Collisions

Mishaps: Dedicated to helping sufferers of car accidents secure fair payout for injuries and harm.

Bike Accidents

Expert in providing representation for individuals involved in two-wheeler accidents, ensuring rightful claims for harm.

Semi Mishap

Providing experienced legal advice for persons involved in truck accidents, focusing on securing just settlement for losses.

Building Incidents

Dedicated to representing laborers or bystanders injured in construction site accidents due to oversights or negligence.

Neurological Traumas

Committed to extending expert legal support for victims suffering from cognitive injuries due to accidents.

K9 Assault Wounds

Proficient in dealing with cases for individuals who have suffered wounds from puppy bites or beast attacks.

Pedestrian Crashes

Dedicated to legal assistance for pedestrians involved in accidents, providing effective representation for recovering claims.

Wrongful Passing

Advocating for families affected by a wrongful death, offering empathetic and professional legal guidance to ensure justice.

Neural Injury

Expert in advocating for patients with paralysis, offering professional legal services to secure settlement.

Instant Case Evaluation

Contact Us Today if you need a Person Injury Lawyer

312-313-2440