62.610 Strict Liability in Tort; General Explanation and Burden of Proof

62.610 Strict Liability in Tort; General Explanation and Burden of Proof The plaintiff, (plaintiff's name), contends that he/she was injured because of a defective product manufactured by the defendant, (defendant company's name). The manufacturer of a product that is sold as new property may be liable or responsible to any person who is injured because of a defect in the product that existed at the time the manufacturer sold the product. However, a manufacturer of a product is not an insurer, and the fact that a product may cause an injury does not necessarily make the manufacturer liable. To recover damages under this rule, a person injured by an allegedly defective product must establish the following three elements by a preponderance of the evidence: a. the product was defective, b. the defect existed at the time the product left the manufacturer's control, and c. the defect in the product was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury. (Choose appropriate defect(s) the jury will be charged on.) The types(s) of product defect(s) alleged by the plaintiff is/are a manufacturing defect, a design defect, and/or a defect because of inadequate warning. There is no single general way to define what constitutes a defect in a product. Whether or not a product is defective is a question of fact to be determined by you, the jury, in each case, based on the instruction that I will give you. O.C.G.A. §51-1-11 Center Chemical Co. v. Parzini, 234 Ga. 868 (1975) Banks v. ICI Americas Inc., 264 Ga. 732 (1994) S K Hand Tool Corp. v. Lowman, 223 Ga. App. 712 (1996)