Products Liability Lawyers in Iowa

When a consumer or industrial product is involved in an injury, people often blame the manufacturer. However, multiple factors can contribute to product-related accidents. Product users don't always read the directions or warnings, they may try to use a product for an unintended use, or use the product recklessly. Many times the product has been altered from its original form.  Unfortunately, the manufacturer is often blamed, especially where the injury may be serious or debilitating, leading to a products liability case. 

Is your company facing products liability issues? We can help you navigate the minefield of products liability. Whitfield & Eddy's products liability lawyers have protected manufacturers, distributers and other companies in the chain of the distribution of a product. Our attorneys have represented or worked with: 

• Self-insured manufacturers
• Retailers, wholesalers, and distributors
• Third-party claims administrators
• Insurers

If you need a products liability attorney anywhere in the nation, our lawyers can help. The right firm. The right fit. Learn more about our products liability practice below. 

Whitfield & Eddy law Products Liability Legal Services 

Products liability plaintiffs' attorneys increasingly rely on technology for legal arguments. You need a firm that understands and uses digital tools to fight their claims. Our vigorous and thoughtful defense employs cutting-edge technology and innovative strategies to protect our clients. 

We understand the importance of protecting your trade secrets in a competitive industry. Our team preserves this information as we prepare your defense or enter settlement discussions. Your company's continued success and sustainability remain our top priorities during any case. 

Products issues and topics that we deal with on a daily basis include, but are not limited to:

• The Restatement of Torts, Third: Products Liability
• Drafting favorable terms and conditions associated with product sales
• Spoliation of evidence
• Admissibility of subsequent remedial measures
• Protective orders relative to commercially-sensitive or proprietary information
• ESI (electronically-stored information) issues connected to products
• Product recall assistance
• Consulting on risk/hazard analysis
• Reviewing product literature and warning labels for compliance with appropriate standards (i.e. ANSI Z535)
• Preparing corporate 30(B)(6) witnesses for deposition
• “Daubert” hearings and motions
• The admissibility of other accidents, claims or lawsuits 
• Consultations on regulatory issues
• Products liability prevention
• Representation of all entities in the chain of distribution
• Nationwide defense of self-insured manufacturers
• Coordination of accident investigations
• Federal court removal

Why Select Whitfield & Eddy law for Your Legal Representation? 

We have earned a reputation for offering sound legal advice while guiding our clients to the most optimal outcomes in products liability cases. Our team is recognized for our leadership roles in this field, our lawyers are regular authors on products liability topics and have presented to audiences of attorneys and owners, managers, and insurers at dozens of regional and national seminars.  Our lawyers are active in the DRI Products Liability Committee, the Product Liability Advisory Committee (PLAC), and the ALFA International Products Liability Steering Committee. 

At Whitfield & Eddy Law, our attorneys depth of understanding of this area comes from their broad backgrounds. Our team has experience with products liability cases across a wide range of industries, including automotive, aviation and aerospace, drug and medical device, industrial, manufacturing, chemical, consumer, agricultural, recreational and children’s products. 

The results reflect our professionalism and commitment to our clients. We have received defense verdicts in countless state and federal court jury trials, reached nominal settlements quite favorable to our clients, and won outright dismissals via summary judgment. 

Contact Our Des Moines Products Liability Attorneys Today

When you enlist the services of Whitfield & Eddy Law, you get a firm that provides a range of legal guidance, as our lawyers collaborate with their colleagues for expertise on related matters.

The right firm. The right fit.

Contact us today to set up an initial consultation about your products liability case. 

Cases and Transactions

agriculture machinery manufacturers

• We successfully obtained a partial summary judgment in federal court on behalf of the seller of a sand reclamation system used in the dairy industry, when a farmer-buyer claimed that the system did not work properly.
• We successfully defended the manufacturer of a portable farm elevator in a state court case in Fulton County, Kentucky, where a worker had moved the elevator into an overhead powerline, causing a fatal electrocution injury. The case was dismissed on the courthouse steps before our motion for summary judgment could be heard by the court.
• We successfully defended the manufacturer of a portable farm elevator involved in an accident in South Dakota. A very young child quite tragically reached into the intake of an auger-type elevator as it was running, sustaining an amputation injury.  The matter was resolved for a nominal amount prior to suit, very favorable to our client.
• We successfully defended the manufacturer of a portable farm elevator involved in an accident in Genesee County, Michigan. A young man got his shirt entangled the shaft drive of the elevator.  Tragically, he sustained an amputation of an arm at the shoulder.  A lawsuit filed in state court was removed by us to the federal court in the Eastern District of Michigan.  Our investigation of the claim revealed that the machine involved had actually been cobbled together by using three different implements, and the part where plaintiff was caught had not been supplied by our company.  When we filed a motion to dismiss the case on summary judgment, plaintiff’s counsel voluntarily dismissed the case with prejudice.

automotive, motorcycle, recreational vehicles, watercraft and parts manufacturers

• Scott v. Dutton-Lainson Co., 774 N,.W.2d 501 (Iowa 2009).  We defended a trailer jack manufacturer in an accident where the jack collapsed, causing serious permanent injury.  After a state court trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.  The dismissal was affirmed on appeal in an important case concerning the inadmissibility of subsequent remedial measures.
• We successfully defended a motorcycle manufacturer in a lawsuit where a physician lost control and sustained a closed-head injury.
• We successfully defended a major tire manufacturer that was sued after a tire exploded in a mounting accident, causing serious injury. After we took the plaintiff’s deposition our client was dismissed from the case.
• Geier v. Honda American Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861, 120 S. Ct. 1913, 146 L.Ed.2d 914 (2000).  In this important United States Supreme Court decision on federal preemption, Whitfield & Eddy attorneys authored an amicus curiae brief on behalf of the Defense Research Institute, Inc.  The position of theamici was adopted by the Court.
• The firm has defended major manufacturers of watercraft, boats and jet skis in defense of product liability claims.
• The firm obtained a dismissal in federal court of a “lemon law” claim filed against a major manufacturer of recreational vehicles (RVs).  The case was filed under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.

Consumer Products manufacturers

• We successfully obtained a summary judgment in federal court on behalf of a manufacturer of a consumer treadmill that allegedly “sped up” on its own, causing an elderly lady to fall and fracture her shoulder.
• In re Teflon Products Liability Litigation, 254 F.R.D. 354 (S.D. Iowa 2008).  The firm served as local counsel for DuPont in defense of this national MDL class action assigned to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.  Plaintiffs sought class certification of twenty-three classes of persons who acquired cookware allegedly coated with DuPont’s “Teflon” product.  In its Order, the Court denied Plaintiffs’ motion to certify a class with regard to every purported class action before the Court.
• The firm has defended several large appliance manufacturers sued in fire/property damage product liability cases.  Many such cases were insurance subrogation actions.
• Wright v. Brooke Group, Ltd., 652 N.W.2d 159 (Iowa 2002).  In this seminal case the Iowa Supreme Court adopted the Restatement (Third) of Torts, Products Liability, Section 2, and abandoned the Restatement (Second) Section 402A.  Whitfield & Eddy attorneys authored the amicus curiae brief on behalf of the Iowa Defense Counsel Association and the Defense Research Institute, Inc.  The position of the amici was adopted.

industrial products and heavy industry manufacturers

• We successfully defended the manufacturer of a tree cutter in a state court case in Minnesota, where a blade broke, struck Plaintiff and caused a permanent leg injury. The case was settled for a nominal amount.
• We successfully defended the owner of an aerial work platform, where Plaintiff had moved the work basket into a “pinch point” and caused positional asphyxia, and a “stuck” valve was found after the accident.
• We successfully defended the manufacturer of an industrial baler, where a workman had entered a scrap removal system, fell into the baler, and triggered the ram, resulting in the traumatic amputation of both legs.
• We successfully defended the manufacturer of a pneumatic nailer, where one worker put a 3½-inch nail into the knee of a co-worker. We received a defense verdict in federal court jury trial.
• We successfully defended the manufacturer of a roof bracket that had allegedly failed, causing a worker to fall and sustain serious, permanent injuries. We received a defense verdict in federal court jury trial.
• We obtained a summary judgment and dismissal of a products case filed against the manufacturer of a crane that had collapsed and caused serious personal injury.  After the product was inspected and disassembled we were successful in proving that the collapse was not caused by any manufacturing, design or warnings defect.
• We defended an Iowa manufacturer who was sued in federal court in Pennsylvania.  The Plaintiff had sustained an amputation injury while operating a machine in a meat packing plant.  The case was tried to a jury and resulted in a defense verdict.
• We defended the manufacturer of a skidsteer loader which was involved in an accident that resulted in a wrongful death claim.  The case was tried to a jury in state court and resulted in a defense verdict.
• Obtained partial summary judgment ruling in Louisiana federal court in which the court strictly enforced liability limiting language in a contract; court held that manufacturer’s liability was capped at the purchase price of the equipment (less than $200,000) even though the Plaintiff sought in excess of $20,000,000 in damages pertaining to alleged product performance deficiencies.

pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers

• We successfully defended the manufacturer of a deep brain stimulator implantable device, where it was alleged that a lead “broke” and caused a second surgery to replace it, which resulted in a brachial plexus injury. The case was dismissed against our client.
• We successfully defended a major supplier of medical devices that was sued after a bulking agent, used to relieve symptoms of urinary incontinence, was implanted in a patient and serious complications (stricture or blockage) resulted.  The plaintiff’s attorney dismissed the product defect and warnings claims against our client with prejudice after we demonstrated that our client was entitled to preemption under the Medical Device Amendments applicable to products subject to pre-market approval under applicable federal law and regulations.

other products manufacturers

• We negotiated favorable settlements on behalf of individual clients who had sustained permanent injuries caused by the ingestion of toxic chemicals.
• We defended the manufacturer of a muzzle-loading rifle that exploded when the Plaintiff allegedly fired it for the first time.  The case was tried to a jury in federal court and resulted in a defense verdict.
• The firm has represented the world’s largest overnight package delivery service in defending motor vehicle accident cases.

• The firm has defended major drug manufacturers in defense of product liability claims.

Industries Served

• Aviation and Aerospace
• Athletic Equipment
• Chemicals
• Commercial Vehicles
• Consumer Products
• Farm Machinery and Equipment
• Firearms
• Food Processing
• Hand and Power Tools
• Household Appliances
• Industrial Machinery and Equipment
• Lawn and Garden Equipment
• Meat Packing Equipment
• Motor Vehicles
• Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories
• Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices
• Recreational Vehicles