Products Liability Attorney in North Peoria

Let Carlson Bier Fight For You

Over $50 Million in Recoveries

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 Products Liability claims, you need a proven expert on your side. Look no further than Carlson Bier. Our attorneys bring years of experience and in-depth knowledge to every case we handle, setting us apart from others in the field. We take pride in our approach which involves meticulous analysis, robust representation and consistent communication with our clients throughout the process, ensuring that they always remain updated about their case. In North Peoria and beyond, individuals who have been affected by defective or faulty products seek our services acknowledging our continuously advanced understanding of Products Liability law. As a result of their dedication and commitment, Carlson Bier attorneys have secured millions for those harmed by unsafe products ranging from medical devices to motor vehicles- showcasing why these seasoned legal professionals should be given top consideration when seeking justice within this specific area of personal injury law. Choose authority; choose assurance – select Carlson Bier for your Products Liability claim requirements.

About Carlson Bier

Products Liability Lawyers in North Peoria Illinois

At Carlson Bier, we understand that products which you trust and rely on can sometimes lead to unexpected and harmful consequences. Your quest for reparations in the face of product-related injuries is a journey we’re more than equipped to navigate with you. As experts in Products Liability Law, our seasoned team of attorneys are committed to helping individuals facing undue hardship as a result of defective or dangerous items.

As personal injury lawyers based right here in Illinois, important components of Product Liability Law fall within our sphere of expertise. It encompasses situations where manufacturers, distributors or suppliers are held liable for distributing defective commodities that cause harm. This litigation category primarily consists of three separate types: manufacturing defects, design defects, and failure-to-warn defects.

• Manufacturing Defects underscore problematic aspects during production that make an item hazardous.

• Design Defects highlight inherent issues stemming from the product’s design even before its manufacture.

• Failure-To-Warn Defects emphasize the absence of adequate instructions or warnings, making item usage unsafe.

Choosing us means selecting an ally who will tirelessly champion your rights while offering clear-cut guidance through the often intricate legal jungle surrounding product liability claims. One fundamental aspect that clients are often unsure about is determining who exactly bears responsibility for their plight? Is it solely the manufacturer? Or does accountability extend to marketing firms involved in promoting said faulty item? We clarify this gray area by highlighting that typically responsibility extends beyond just the actual producer and includes every party within distribution channels right up to sales points.

Also noteworthy is our approach towards time constraints common within such disputes. Contrary to popular belief or misinformation spread across social circles, filing lawsuits doesn’t have infinitely elastic timelines attached – state laws stipulate distinct time frames where claim submissions may be entertained; referred as statute limitations details.

We hence pledge a prompt investigation into your case ensuring expedient action before lapse deadlines potentially affect claim validity–remaining perpetually cognizant that compensation delays only intensify victim suffering. We stand side by side with you, giving credence to your agonizing experience.

The reality however is that not all product-related grievances qualify for liability lawsuits under law premises –another area we shed light on helping distinguish genuine legal claims from those falling short of required prerequisites. For instance, every injury doesn’t automatically guarantee entitlement; it’s necessary to prove actual product defects instigated said harm while demonstrating its usage as per customary or instructed norms when incident occurred.

In the backdrop of aforementioned concerns and considerations, our resolute commitment extends beyond mere lawsuit navigation–laying emphasis on education sharing that transcends typical client-attorney relation confines. To this end, we maintain an updated online library hosting a plethora of articles addressing diverse product liability subject matters – aimed towards arming readers with insights facilitating informed decisions in potential future claim scenarios.

We urge clients to consider utilizing professional aid from experts such as us at Carlson Bier who are adept at dealing not just with intricate maze nuances inherent within product liability negotiations but also tackling possible courtroom trials if settlements cannot be agreed upon amicably–ensuring victims aren’t left stranded during any litigation phase regardless where it leads them.

To conclude, as valued patrons navigating digital waters seeking information about Product Liability Law and how best to defend your right here in Illinois, your journey needn’t lead elsewhere. Righteous compensation pursuit begins here because Carlson Bier stands steadfastly committed protecting consumer rights ensuring they get justice deserved after unwittingly falling prey manufacturing negligence due defective products.

Your reluctance partnering up till now speaks volumes about apprehensions probably related potential costs involved post attorney hire— Allow us dissipate such fear clouds confirming our policy where remuneration is only applicable once successful case conclusion has been reached—that’s our no win, no fees ethos!

While words possibly paint convincing pictures illustrating firm authority over pertinent aspects governing product liability dynamics within state jurisdictions—not experiencing services firsthand hardly suffices potential client interests who want results, not assurances.

So why remain in suspense? Especially when steps towards unveiling legal claim’s probable net worth stand tantalizingly within grasp! Go ahead, click on the button below and allow expert attorneys help unravel your case’s actual monetary value. Trial run else secondary consultation apprehensions shouldn’t deter progress—remember Carlson Bier awaits with warm assurance that our client roster adds another name determined seeking closure they so rightly deserve.

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 North Peoria Residents

Links
Legal Blogs

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 North Peoria

Areas of Practice in North Peoria

Pedal Cycle Collisions

Expert in legal assistance for individuals injured in bicycle accidents due to others' recklessness or risky conditions.

Fire Traumas

Giving specialist legal support for victims of severe burn injuries caused by occurrences or negligence.

Hospital Misconduct

Ensuring expert legal services for persons affected by clinical malpractice, including misdiagnosis.

Items Liability

Taking on cases involving defective products, supplying expert legal assistance to individuals affected by product malfunctions.

Geriatric Malpractice

Representing the rights of aged individuals who have been subjected to mistreatment in elderly care environments, ensuring fairness.

Stumble & Stumble Mishaps

Professional in managing fall and trip accident cases, providing legal support to persons seeking compensation for their harm.

Birth Traumas

Delivering legal support for kin affected by medical negligence resulting in newborn injuries.

Car Incidents

Accidents: Committed to assisting sufferers of car accidents get equitable remuneration for damages and losses.

Motorbike Mishaps

Dedicated to providing legal advice for victims involved in motorbike accidents, ensuring justice for harm.

Truck Accident

Extending specialist legal support for individuals involved in truck accidents, focusing on securing just claims for damages.

Construction Mishaps

Engaged in assisting staff or bystanders injured in construction site accidents due to safety violations or recklessness.

Head Injuries

Specializing in ensuring specialized legal assistance for victims suffering from head injuries due to incidents.

Canine Attack Injuries

Expertise in handling cases for clients who have suffered injuries from puppy bites or animal attacks.

Cross-walker Accidents

Dedicated to legal assistance for joggers involved in accidents, providing expert advice for recovering recovery.

Unjust Demise

Advocating for families affected by a wrongful death, providing understanding and expert legal support to ensure compensation.

Backbone Impairment

Focused on advocating for patients with spine impairments, offering professional legal representation to secure redress.

Contact Us Today if you need a Person Injury Lawyer