We’re trial lawyers. Our core competency – above everything else – is trying cases to juries. And we specialize in beating giants.
We’re trial lawyers. Our core competency – above everything else – is trying cases to juries. And we specialize in beating giants.
When you use a product that doesn’t act or function as it should, you may have been severely hurt. Your loved ones may have suffered, too. A product that fails to act properly could have malfunctioned because of negligence. These events are often unexpected and you may not know what to do next. Your injuries may have costly medical bills and the impact on your daily life can be staggering. If this is the case, you may be able to take legal action with the help of our Minneapolis product liability lawyer. We can help you get compensation for your injuries.
With Madia Newville by your side, you can feel confident that you’ll recover what you deserve financially from the negligent company or manufacturer who harmed you. When you use a product as intended and it hurts you, you’re left with injuries and feeling vulnerable. That’s where Madia Newville can come in to support you and make you feel confident in your claim.
Madia Newville can help protect clients who have been injured because of faulty products. When you’re seeking justice for a defective product, we’ll carefully examine your case so we can find out what went wrong and why. To make your case as strong as possible, we will look into how the product was supposed to work, how it malfunctioned, and how you were hurt.
In Minnesota, product liability refers to liability for damages including:
These damages come from an issue with a product and the issue can occur at the various stages of the product getting to the market. Manufacturing, design, importation, distribution, packaging, labeling, lease, and sale are these stages. Any member of a company along the way of these stages of development could be liable for the product defect.
As you can see, there are many points where the product could have become dangerous. Madia Newville will investigate to find where this happened.
There may be other factors about your case that could mean the rules of strict liability apply. For example, if the defective product was unreasonably dangerous, then this may mean strict liability will apply to your case. Ashwin will be able to tell you how to proceed. If you’re pursuing a strict liability claim, it’s important to know that Minnesota’s statute of limitations for this action is four years.
The law surrounding defective products can get complex, especially when multiple parties or companies are involved. This is why having Madia Newville as your Minnesota product liability lawyer can give you peace of mind.
There are numerous products that have the potential to be defective and cause injuries. One of these products may have hurt you or a loved one.
However, these are just some examples of the types of products that can cause serious injuries. If you don’t see the type of product, you should still contact our product liability lawyer at Madia Newville. We’ll be able to review your case and determine if you have grounds for legal action.
When you have Ashwin as your product liability lawyer, he’ll find evidence of the negligence that caused your injuries and damages. Some possible instances where negligence could have made the product faulty include:
Then, Madia Newville will seek compensation for the injuries and losses you’ve suffered. A defective product can completely change your life—it may have caused catastrophic injuries or injuries that will leave permanent disfigurement or scarring. You deserve compensation that will cover your medical costs, the wages from the days of work you’ve missed, property damage, loss of enjoyment of life, and emotional distress.
If a faulty product caused you to lose your loved one, Madia Newville can help you through this difficult time. We have wrongful death lawyers who will fight for your family to get justice for your loved one.
There are many ways that a faulty product could harm you. Physically, emotionally, and financially you could be suffering from what happened. Since it wasn’t your fault that you were hurt, you shouldn’t have to worry about all those damages that you incurred. With the help of Madia Newville, you’ll be able to recover full and fair compensation for what the defective product has caused you.
One of the types of damages that we will use in our calculations is economic. These are from the physical costs that you incurred from the company or manufacturer’s negligence. Costs like medical bills, future costs of care, medical equipment, lost wages, and loss of ability to work are all considered economic damages and can be used toward the value that you can recover from the other party.
Another form of damages are noneconomic. These are the abstract costs that you’ve suffered, like pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and if a loved one passes from their injuries from a defective product, then loss of consortium could also be calculated into your damages.
The final kind of damages that you might be able to recover in your claim are punitive damages. These are awarded when gross negligence was present, and the manufacturer is being punished for their actions. Our Minneapolis product liability lawyer can help you determine what you’re owed in damages so that you don’t settle for less than you deserve.
Negligent companies need to be held accountable when their mistakes harm others. Madia Newville will stand by your side and fight for you to recover damages. We will do everything we can to secure your financial future.
To get started, contact us today.
We have a process that works in getting exceptional results for our clients.
We are trial lawyers who prepare every case for trial from Day 1. Investigation and legal research are the first things we do, and we spend a lot of time on them. Because we haven’t filed the case yet, we have complete control – the defendant has no say and we want to use this time wisely. We interview witnesses that can help us prove the case. We’ll ask you for all relevant documents in your possession and review those carefully as well. We also will spend some time conducting legal research about unique issues in the case. We pull the jury instructions that the judge will ultimately charge the jury with after closing arguments at trial.
Our next step is typically to send a demand letter to the defendant. In the letter, we thoroughly lay out: the facts surrounding the defendant’s misconduct; the applicable law (including statutory and case citations) that make clear that the defendant broke the law; an analysis of your damages and the defendant’s monetary exposure; a demand for a monetary amount to settle the claim; and an instruction to preserve all relevant evidence, including electronic evidence. The point of this letter is to give the defendant a chance to do the right thing and pay a fair amount before litigation, and to give the defendant an opportunity to present any defenses or evidence it wants us to consider before moving forward. Sometimes we skip the demand letter if there are strategic reasons to move straight to filing, but we typically give defendants a chance to do the right thing.
If early negotiations fail, great – we file a Complaint and serve the defendant with it. A Complaint is a legal document that states the facts of what happened and alleges how the defendant broke the law. It formally starts the lawsuit. Many lawyers draft complaints in a general and relatively vague way, just to get it done and filed – because that’s all that’s really required. We take a different view. We view the Complaint as our first chance to tell your story to the judge, and we take it seriously. So we draft detailed complaints and include legal citations to statutory and judicial authority on unique points. Sometimes we’ll include a number of exhibits, diagrams, or other demonstrative aids to help the Court understand our claims. A secondary benefit of this approach is that defense lawyers reading the Complaint can become educated on the problems of their case and the state of the law – sometimes this leads them to reach out to us shortly after service of the Complaint to re-initiate settlement negotiations. Of course, by that time, the price for settlement has gone up.
Some lawyers view written discovery as a necessary evil – something to get done and out of the way before depositions. Not us. Written discovery is a gift and an opportunity. We spend a great deal of time crafting requests for documents and interrogatories (questions for the defendant to answer in writing) that are specific, detailed, and tailored to get what we need to prove our case. Many lawyers – even great ones – think written discovery is a waste of time because defense lawyers typically answer them on behalf of their clients and can try to stonewall with legalese and objections. We view this as a wonderful opportunity. In our experience, most defense lawyers can’t help themselves when answering discovery: they over-state their defenses and make assertions that their clients will not be able to support in testimony. So we get to commit the defendant to defenses that they can’t back up, leading to contradictions, confusion, and chaos in their depositions later on. We also use Requests for Admission – which many lawyers don’t. The Federal Rules and Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure allow us to ask defendants to “admit” certain facts. We send them RFAs that are very difficult for them to deny. Of course, they do it anyway, but that sets them up later for cost and fee-shifting, which the Rules mandate for defendants that deny RFAs that are later proven true. And usually, we can get the defendants’ own witnesses to admit facts that their defense lawyers denied in RFA. That’s a great situation that leads to more chaos and confusion on the defense side.
One last point on written discovery – we send multiple waves of it throughout discovery. We typically send 3 or 4 sets of written discovery requests to defendants throughout discovery. This compounds the problems for them, because the defense lawyers continue to overstate their defenses, but now run into contradictions from not just the defendant witnesses’ deposition testimony, but also their own previous discovery responses. This makes for a great record that we can present to the judge at dispositive motions, and use for impeachment at trial.
This is our chance to question relevant witnesses, on the record with a court reporter (we typically videotape important depositions as well). We get to confront the defense witnesses with all of the evidence we’ve developed through written discovery and document production. By this time, the defendant put its witnesses in an impossible position through its written defenses, which are often untrue and indefensible. So the witness has to either lie to support the defense, or admit it’s not true. That’s a dilemma that works for our clients either way, no matter which option the witness takes. We use depositions to expose contradictions, create a record for dispositive motions, lock witnesses into their stories so that we can impeach them later at trial, and sometimes, to show defense lawyers how hopeless their case is. We often calls from defense counsel shortly after depositions of their clients, seeking to re-start settlement negotiations.
The defendant will usually make a motion for summary judgment after discovery, asking the Court to throw out the case without having a jury trial. Because we’ve hit discovery so hard – both through written discovery and depositions – this is a tough motion for defense counsel to write in our cases. We draft our response for the Court and now get to bring everything together: the admissions, contradictions, nonsense, and obvious fact disputes that we’ve uncovered through discovery. We tell a compelling story that wraps everything together for the Court and makes clear that the defense motion has to be denied, and the defendant needs to face a jury for its conduct.
Sometimes, we’ll even make an affirmative motion for summary judgment, asking the Court to grant judgment in favor of our client without a trial. These motions are generally rare for plaintiffs to make, because the defendant can usually point to some fact dispute on its intent or some other factor that necessitates a trial. But we make affirmative summary judgment motions significantly more than is typical for plaintiffs, and that’s because the work we put in during discovery helps build a fantastic record to do so.
After the Court denies the defense motion for summary judgment, the defendant has only 2 options: 1) do the right thing and pay you a fair amount to our client to settle your claim (usually much, much more at this point than the defendant could have paid at the beginning of the case to settle); or 2) face a jury for its conduct and risk an enormous verdict. This is the dilemma that we have been creating and forcing the defendant into for the entire case. We’ll engage in settlement negotiations at this point from a position of extreme strength, mainly because most defendants are (rightly) terrified of facing a jury to defend their conduct.
This is, candidly, our favorite part of the case – why we went to law school: to hold the powerful accountable before juries. We prepare heavily for trial, including: detailed witness preparation, focus groups, and mock trials. At this point, the potential outcomes and consequences for the defendant are much more severe than if it simply did the right thing at the beginning of the case and paid a fair amount to compensate our client for its misconduct. As we advocate to the jury for our client, we’re also mindful of protecting the record so that defendants will be unsuccessful in attacking the verdict in post-trial motions or appeal.