Plymouth Product Liability Lawyers

At Jeffrey Glassman Injury Lawyers, our team has dedicated more than three decades to representing consumers injured by defective products. From children’s toys and medical devices to household appliances and auto parts, we have seen firsthand how a single flaw in design, manufacturing, or warnings can upend lives. Our Plymouth product liability lawyers combine deep knowledge of Massachusetts law with a proven record of settlements and verdicts, providing clients with an unmatched level of expertise.

Massachusetts follows a hybrid approach that incorporates strict liability, negligence, and breach-of-warranty theories. While the Commonwealth has not formally adopted Section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, the Supreme Judicial Court treats defective products claims as a subset of negligence under Back v. Wickes Corp., 375 Mass. 633 (1978). In practical terms, this means that proving negligence is not always required; evidence that a product was unreasonably dangerous when it left the hands of the manufacturer can be enough. Our lawyers understand how to frame each case under the most favorable theory, maximizing the chance of recovery.

• Back v. Wickes Corp. – established a strict liability-style consumer expectations test.
• Haglund v. Philip Morris Inc., 446 Mass. 741 (2006) – clarified post-sale duty to warn.
• Massachusetts General Laws (M.G.L.) ch. 106, § 2-318 – broad warranty protection for anyone reasonably expected to use the product.
• M.G.L. ch. 93A – Consumer Protection Act allowing multiple damages for unfair or deceptive practices.

• Medical implants and devices such as hip replacements, transvaginal mesh, and pacemakers. The FDA’s adverse event reports often reveal patterns of injury long before recalls are issued.
• Automotive defects include airbag failures, faulty ignition switches, and SUV rollover designs.
• Household appliances and electronics that ignite or explode due to wiring flaws or inadequate thermal protection.
• Children’s products, toys painted with lead-based pigments, cribs with entrapment hazards, and unsecured furniture that can tip.
• Pharmaceuticals and over-the-counter drugs that lack adequate warnings about side effects or interact dangerously with common medications.

Our attorneys stay ahead of recalls issued by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), so we can alert Plymouth residents as soon as a dangerous product hits the market.

Design Defect – The blueprint itself is unsafe; every product coming off the line is hazardous. We often rely on safer-alternative-design analysis and expert testimony to show a reasonable manufacturer would have adopted a different design.

Manufacturing Defect – The design is sound, but something went wrong on the assembly line. A single cracked weld or contaminated batch can trigger hundreds of claims. Early preservation of the defective unit is critical.

Failure to Warn / Marketing Defect – Even a well-designed product can injure if users are not warned about foreseeable risks. Massachusetts recognizes a continuing post-sale duty to warn when new hazards come to light.

A persuasive product liability case relies on three pillars:

1. Expert Analysis – Mechanical engineers, biomedical scientists, and human factors specialists analyze the product’s failure mode.
2. Chain of Custody – Preserving the product in its post-incident state prevents spoliation claims and allows defense experts to inspect the same evidence.
3. Medical Documentation – Linking the defect to the plaintiff’s specific injuries through medical records, treating physician testimony, and sometimes biomechanical testing.

Our in-house evidence team coordinates these steps within days of being retained to prevent the loss of crucial proof.

Massachusetts generally provides three years from the date of injury to file a product liability lawsuit (M.G.L. ch. 260, § 2A). However, a statute of repose bars actions filed more than 12 years after the date the product was first sold for use or consumption, regardless of when the injury occurs. Exceptions are narrow and require strategic framing, especially where latent medical device defects surface years later. Our attorneys have successfully argued for tolling in cases involving fraudulent concealment and ongoing warranty obligations.

• Medical expenses: past bills and projected future treatment estimated with life-care planners.
• Lost income and diminished earning capacity: proved through vocational assessments and economic expert testimony.
• Pain and suffering: physical discomfort, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life.
• Punitive or multiple damages: in cases involving willful or reckless conduct under M.G.L. ch. 93A.
• Wrongful death damages: if a loved one is lost, the estate may recover funeral costs, loss of reasonably expected income, and conscious pain and suffering endured before death.

Investigative Resources – Our firm uses cutting-edge 3D scanning, CT imaging, and finite element analysis to reconstruct product failures.

Industry Knowledge – By tracking recall databases, patent filings, and industry standards (UL, ISO, ASTM), we uncover deviations that prove negligence.

Collaborative Approach – We partner with Plymouth medical providers, vocational experts, and rehabilitation specialists so clients receive comprehensive support while litigation proceeds.

Trial-Ready Posture – Insurance carriers know we will take a case to verdict if they refuse fair value. This reputation often accelerates favorable settlements.

Absolutely. Store it in a safe, dry location and photograph it from multiple angles. Do not attempt repairs. If you no longer have the product, contact us immediately; we can often locate identical exemplars or subpoena the remainder of the production batch.

Misuse does not automatically bar recovery. The key question is whether the misuse was reasonably foreseeable. Courts examine age, instructions provided, and industry custom.

Yes. Designers, component suppliers, distributors, and retailers may all share responsibility. Massachusetts applies comparative fault, so each defendant is typically liable only for their percentage of fault.

We operate on a contingency-fee basis, with no attorney’s fees unless we secure compensation. Initial consultations are free.

• Seek immediate medical attention and follow all treatment recommendations.
• Preserve the product, packaging, receipts, and instruction manuals.
• Document the scene: photographs, witness names, and any safety warnings posted nearby.
• Report the incident to the CPSC or FDA when appropriate; our office can assist in filing these reports.
• Contact Jeffrey Glassman Injury Lawyers promptly so we can issue preservation letters and initiate an expert inspection.

Plymouth, the "America’s Hometown", has evolved from a historic seaport to a vibrant South Shore hub of biotech, manufacturing, and tourism. With growth comes a flow of consumer goods from around the globe. Our firm maintains a satellite office minutes from the Plymouth District Court to ensure residents have direct access to top-tier representation without traveling to Boston.

Beyond litigation, we sponsor local safety initiatives, including annual car-seat inspection clinics and high-school science fairs that encourage safer product design. We believe advocacy extends beyond the courtroom.

• $4.2 million settlement for a Plymouth family after a space heater ignited their condominium due to a faulty thermal cutoff switch.
• $3.1 million jury verdict involving a defective hip implant that required revision surgery. Expert testimony revealed that the cobalt-chromium alloy corroded under normal use.
• $1.8 million mediated resolution on behalf of a child who suffered chemical burns from mislabeled pool sanitizer tablets.

While every case is unique and past results do not guarantee future success, these outcomes reflect our commitment to meticulous preparation and fearless advocacy.

Case Evaluation – Free consultation and preliminary product review.

Preservation & Inspection – Formal letters to manufacturers and retailers; chain-of-custody protocol; engagement of engineers.

Filing & Discovery – Drafting of a detailed complaint in Plymouth Superior Court, followed by document requests, depositions, and expert exchanges.

Settlement Negotiations – Mediation or direct discussions leveraging our damage model.

Trial or Arbitration – If defendants refuse a just settlement, we present the case to a jury with demonstrative exhibits that make complex engineering accessible.

Post-Trial Recovery – Enforcement of judgment, appeal defense, and coordination with medical lienholders to maximize net client recovery.

Defective products endanger thousands of Massachusetts residents each year. If you or a loved one has been injured in Plymouth or anywhere on the South Shore, contact Jeffrey Glassman Injury Lawyers today. Our product liability team stands ready to investigate, litigate, and secure the compensation you deserve.