Products are supposed to work. When a ladder buckles, a power tool's guard fails, a battery ignites, or an airbag doesn't deploy, the injury feels like betrayal — you used the thing as intended, and it hurt you anyway. What most people don't realize is that the law treats these cases very differently from ordinary negligence claims, in ways that generally favor the injured person.
Whiteford Mountain West is the Colorado front door of Whiteford, a firm with a national trial platform — depth that matters enormously in product cases, where the defendant is often a large manufacturer with practiced defense counsel and engineering resources of its own.
This page explains how strict liability works in Colorado, why so many vehicle crashes hide a product case inside them, and why preserving the product itself is the first rule of these claims.
Strict liability: why you don't have to prove the manufacturer was careless
Most injury claims require proving someone acted negligently. Product liability is different. Under strict liability principles, the core questions are about the product, not the manufacturer's state of mind: was it defective, did the defect exist when it left the defendant's hands, and did the defect cause the injury while the product was being used in a reasonably foreseeable way. A company can have excellent intentions and still be liable for a defective design.
Defects come in three recognized forms. Manufacturing defects are one-off flaws — the single ladder with a bad weld. Design defects make every unit dangerous — a product that tips, ignites, or fails under expected use. Warning defects involve hazards the maker knew about but failed to adequately disclose. Each theory calls for different proof, and strong cases are often built on more than one.
- Manufacturing defects: this particular unit was flawed when it shipped
- Design defects: the entire product line is unreasonably dangerous as designed
- Warning defects: known hazards weren't adequately disclosed to users
- Sellers and distributors in the supply chain can sometimes share responsibility with the manufacturer
The auto-defect crossover: when a crash is also a product case
Some of the most serious product cases in Colorado begin as ordinary-looking car crashes. An airbag that failed to deploy, a seatback that collapsed, a roof that crushed in a rollover, a fuel system that ignited, a tire that delaminated at highway speed — each can convert a crash claim against a driver into a defect claim against a manufacturer. That matters because the harshest injuries in a crash are often caused not by the collision itself but by the vehicle's failure to protect its occupants.
The sign to watch for is disproportion: injuries far more severe than the crash forces would predict, or a vehicle component that visibly failed. When that pattern appears, the vehicle itself becomes the central evidence, and it must be preserved before an insurer totals it and sends it to auction or salvage.
Rule one: preserve the product, then build the case
In a product case, the product is the case. Discard the failed space heater, let the totaled car be scrapped, or return the recalled device, and the claim may go with it — defense experts will argue that nothing can be proven about evidence nobody can examine. Keep the product, its packaging, manuals, and receipts, and touch it as little as possible. Our team moves quickly to secure formal preservation, engineering inspection, and, where relevant, the vehicle before it disappears into the salvage pipeline.
If you're weighing whether what happened to you is 'a case,' start with a free consultation — we'll give you an honest read. Our free case estimator is also available anytime as an educational first step.
