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

Products Liability Attorney in De Soto

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 selecting a Products Liability attorney, your choice is paramount in achieving favorable results. Trusting Carlson Bier puts you at an advantage. Based in Illinois, we pride ourselves on our proven record tackling complicated product liability issues and successfully representing clients with claims like design defects, manufacturing defects or failure to provide adequate warnings or instructions regarding the safe use of a product. Our meticulous approach ensures that every possible angle is scrutinized as we work passionately to secure justice for you. We continually update our knowledge about state and federal regulations surrounding defective products litigation to keep pace with evolving laws. As seasoned negotiators with decades of courtroom experience, our attorneys are committed to tenacious advocacy when it comes to protecting all consumers’ rights- ensuring you get the financial compensation you deserve after suffering harm due to an unsafe product use within De Soto’s locality jurisdiction. Choose Carlson Bier; let us guide your fight for justice while maintaining adherence to pertinent ethical standards set by Illinois law governing legal practice.

Meet Our Attorneys
About Carlson Bier

Products Liability Lawyers in De Soto Illinois

As a trusted Injury Law Firm in Illinois, Carlson Bier is your dedicated partner when you face groundbreaking legal issues that come about due to product related injuries. Our steadfast commitment to fight for your rights brings us right at the forefront of processes involved in handling Products Liability cases.

Product Liability is a crucial area of Personal Injury law that deals with consequences arising out of faulty and defective goods or products. The domain covers the spectrum from minor glitches causing slight bruises to severe malfunctions leading to permanent disabilities or fatal casualties. In such scenarios, it’s essential for victims to be aware of their fundamental rights which allow them to take legal actions against manufacturing companies, retailers, wholesale dealers or any other party responsible in the delivery chain that gives rise to damage caused by a substandard product.

Here are some key elements pertaining to Product Liability Law:

– Legal professionals need concrete proof showcasing that the damaged product was indeed defective.

– The defect must have been present prior to its reaching the end-user.

– The victim should endure an injury as a direct result of using defected products.

– Lastly, identifiable damages – physical or financial – must have transpired due to this incident.

Steering through complex litigation involving Products Liability is far from being straightforward. Concerns around defining liability amidst multiple stakeholders along supply chains often makes these claims process intensive and require specialized expertise. This necessitates your partnering with an experienced attorney firm like Carlson Bier who can advocate on your behalf picking up not just monetary compensations but also justice and closure after harrowing incidents like these.

We cover all types of Product Liabilities suits: clear-cut defects during manufacture where quality control measures fail; design defects which inherently predispose risks even if produced exactly according to specifications; absence or insufficient instructions/warnings regarding careful usage thereby potentially instigating unintentional accidents.

Our deep understanding cultivated over years around nuances tied with personal injury laws coupled with established relationships across medical facilities geared towards accidental traumas – are all strong testaments of the exceptional value propositions we bring on-board for our clients. We march alongside you in your journey – right from filing lawsuits to presenting robust evidences, chronicling medical histories closely tied with injuries to working out settlements applicable under Illinois laws.

As an Injury law firm dedicated within Illinois, Carlson Bier is aware about specifics of operating across different cities within the state. We validate all information related to our geographical operations in strict compliance with Illinois regulation which precludes citing office premises across cities where no physical presence exists.

Value resides underneath every line that we draw as part of your legal consultation process. Our motto drives us to ensure that best recourse available under the law mustn’t be leaving our client’s side at any juncture. Now, when it’s about figuring ‘how much would my case worth’, assessing such requires meticulous considerations around factual particulars involved and cannot be generalized or estimated without a thorough analysis by proficient attorneys.

We have deployed a smart tool below which aids you ascertain indicative monetary worth associated with unique cases. It’s streamlined for anyone who wishes authenticity tailored according to their situation rendered through our proven expert interventions. So why wait? Reach out and click on the button below to find out how much your case may be worth!

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 De Soto 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 De Soto

Areas of Practice in De Soto

Two-Wheeler Mishaps

Specializing in legal representation for victims injured in bicycle accidents due to other parties' lack of care or dangerous conditions.

Scald Traumas

Giving skilled legal support for individuals of grave burn injuries caused by incidents or carelessness.

Healthcare Malpractice

Providing professional legal services for patients affected by medical malpractice, including medication mistakes.

Items Liability

Taking on cases involving problematic products, supplying adept legal support to clients affected by product-related injuries.

Geriatric Neglect

Supporting the rights of the elderly who have been subjected to neglect in senior centers environments, ensuring restitution.

Slip and Stumble Mishaps

Professional in addressing stumble accident cases, providing legal assistance to individuals seeking redress for their harm.

Newborn Damages

Delivering legal aid for kin affected by medical negligence resulting in neonatal injuries.

Motor Accidents

Accidents: Committed to guiding sufferers of car accidents obtain reasonable remuneration for injuries and destruction.

Bike Collisions

Expert in providing legal assistance for motorcyclists involved in bike accidents, ensuring fair compensation for injuries.

Trucking Mishap

Delivering expert legal support for persons involved in big rig accidents, focusing on securing adequate settlement for losses.

Construction Site Collisions

Dedicated to representing employees or bystanders injured in construction site accidents due to negligence or irresponsibility.

Cerebral Injuries

Expert in ensuring specialized legal representation for clients suffering from cerebral injuries due to misconduct.

K9 Assault Injuries

Specialized in handling cases for victims who have suffered wounds from puppy bites or animal assaults.

Jogger Collisions

Focused on legal representation for joggers involved in accidents, providing expert advice for recovering restitution.

Unjust Passing

Striving for families affected by a wrongful death, delivering sensitive and expert legal support to ensure justice.

Vertebral Harm

Committed to representing clients with vertebral damage, offering expert legal services to secure settlement.

Instant Case Evaluation

Contact Us Today if you need a Person Injury Lawyer

312-313-2440