Baltimore Product Liability Lawyer - 14 West Madison Street, Baltimore, MD 21201

You bought a product, trusted it to work, and it hurt you. Now the bills are coming in, you’ve missed work, and the company that made the product is already protecting itself. If a product was made wrong, designed badly, or sold without a proper warning, you may have a claim for your medical bills, lost earnings, and pain and suffering, or for a loved one’s wrongful death.

The Baltimore product liability lawyers at WGK Personal Injury Lawyers help you seek the most compensation possible from the manufacturer and the other companies responsible. Call us at (410) 837-2144 for a free consultation.

Product liability is the legal responsibility a company carries when a defective product injures someone. You usually have no way to know a product is dangerous until it’s already hurt you, and by then the company that built it has a head start. Closing that head start is what our team exists to do.

How WGK Personal Injury Lawyers Can Help You With Your Product Liability Case

How WGK Personal Injury Lawyers Can Help You With Your Product Liability Case

A defective-product case is won or lost on evidence, and most of that evidence sits with the company that made the product. Here is what our team actually does for you.

We move first to preserve the product, the packaging, and any receipts or incident records, before the manufacturer can inspect, repair, or quietly recover the item that proves your claim. We investigate how the failure occurred and trace the defective part back through the distribution chain, from the store that sold it to the company that actually built it.

We gather your medical records and bills, document how the injury has changed your daily life, and bring in engineers and product-testing experts to show the product was defective, not misused. From there, we build the demand, negotiate with the manufacturer’s insurer, and file suit and take the case to trial when the insurer won’t pay what your injury is worth.

You won’t face the company’s lawyers and adjusters alone. The insurer’s goal is to limit what it pays, usually by asking you for a recorded statement early or floating a quick, low offer before you know what your case is worth. We handle them so you can focus on getting better. We work on contingency, so there’s no fee unless we win, and your first consultation is free.

Call (410) 837-2144 and let us review what happened to you.

Injured, Hon? We can help.

Free consultation. You pay nothing unless we win.

Call (410) 837-2144Free consultation online

When to Call a Baltimore Product Liability Lawyer

Call a lawyer as soon as you suspect a product caused your injury. There is one step that protects your case more than any other, and the longer you wait, the harder it becomes to take it.

Product-caused injuries are rarely isolated, and the proof you need is time-sensitive.

Consumer-product incidents cost the United States more than $1 trillion a year in deaths, injuries, and property damage, according to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. The Commission oversees the safety of thousands of product types and has run a hospital-based injury surveillance system for more than 45 years.34 But the evidence in your specific case (the product, the packaging, the receipts, and the incident history) can disappear fast. A lawyer who gets involved early can pull and preserve it before the manufacturer’s lawyers do.

Speak with an attorney quickly if a household item, power tool, appliance, children’s product, or vehicle part injured you and you still have the product, its packaging, or the receipt. Manufacturers move fast to inspect, repair, or recover the very item that proves your case, and once it’s gone, your evidence is gone with it.

The single most important step is simple: keep the product. Do not return it, repair it, or throw it away. Store any broken pieces exactly as they were when the product hurt you, and then call (410) 837-2144.

Overview of Product Liability Claims

Product liability claims are not always linked to an obviously dangerous product. Many serious events, including car accidents, house fires, and workplace injuries, happen because a product was designed, built, or marketed badly.

Examples of products that can be the basis of a product liability claim include:

  • Asbestos in old insulation or flooring that later causes mesothelioma
  • A small space heater that causes fatal carbon monoxide poisoning
  • A vehicle airbag that deploys without warning and causes serious injury
  • An amusement park ride that throws a rider and causes a traumatic brain injury
  • An SUV that rolls over and crushes the roof onto the people inside
  • A defective tire that fails at highway speed and causes a crash

What Product Liability Is in Maryland

Product liability is the legal responsibility a company bears when a defective product causes injury. In Maryland, the main rule comes from Phipps v. General Motors Corp., a 1976 Maryland Court of Appeals decision that adopted strict tort liability under a decades-old legal principle that makes companies liable for dangerous products regardless of fault for products sold in a defective condition that are not reasonably safe for their intended use.1

Strict liability is the part that works in your favor. Under the theory of strict liability, you do not have to prove the company was careless. You only have to prove the product was in a defective condition not reasonably safe for its intended use when it left the seller’s hands.1

The court’s reasoning was simple: proving a defect that makes a product unreasonably dangerous is sufficient to impose liability, without requiring the injured person to prove specific careless acts.

What is a Defective Product?

A defective product can be something you bought, something you used, or a part inside something else that caused the harm. You do not have to be the buyer to have a claim. Examples include:

  • You were a passenger on a bus that crashed because of a defective tire. You may have a claim even though you never bought or used that tire.
  • You bought a vehicle years ago and were hurt when the airbag deployed while you were stopped at a light. You may not know the airbag inflator was made by an outside parts supplier.
  • You were issued standard military earplugs that caused hearing loss. You did not choose them, but you may still have a valid claim. WGK handles 3M earplug injury claims.

Product Liability Claims Based On Negligence, Breach Of Warranty, Misrepresentation Of Facts, Or Strict Liability

The Maryland strict-liability rule from Phipps v. General Motors Corp. is covered in the section above. The point worth adding here is who you can sue under any product-liability theory. A lawsuit for a defective product can be brought against any company in the product’s chain of distribution, including:

  • The company that made the finished product
  • The company that made a defective part inside the product (the airbag example)
  • The company that assembles or installs the product
  • The wholesaler or distributor
  • The store that sold the product to the consumer

Evaluating Products for Defects and Determining Product Liability

Product liability cases are difficult and are defended aggressively by corporate lawyers and insurance companies. Maryland courts use one of two tests to decide whether a product was defective:

  • Consumer expectation test: This assesses whether the product performed as an ordinary user would expect.
  • Risk/utility test: This weighs whether a safer alternative design could have reduced the danger. It often requires expert testimony.

The Maryland Court of Appeals confirmed this framework in Halliday v. Sturm, Ruger & Co.2 Proving the defect can require product testing, analysis, and expert witnesses, because big drug companies, car makers, and food producers have millions of dollars to spend defending these lawsuits. That is why the resources available to your lawyer matter as much as the law.

At WGK Personal Injury Lawyers, we handle product liability claims involving design defects, manufacturing defects, and marketing defects. Each type is explained below.

Design Defect Claims

A design defect claim traces the danger of a product back to its design and plans. In Maryland, the court considers whether a maker knew of the risks built into the product and unreasonably put it on the market anyway. Design defect claims also cover products built without basic safety devices, such as power tools without finger guards.

Design Defect Case Example

Some classic design-defect cases involve vehicles whose fuel systems could rupture and catch fire in a moderate rear-end collision, exposing people to serious burn injury or death. Evidence in those product liability lawsuits showed the automaker could have fixed the hazardous design at a small cost, but chose to defer the fix based on a cost-benefit analysis. The company decided the cost of fixing the design was not worth it compared to paying the occasional lawsuit.

Manufacturing Defect Claims

A manufacturing defect claim traces the danger back to how the product was built. The product came off the line differently from its own design and plans.

Manufacturing Defect Case Example

Food contamination cases are common examples of manufacturing defects. A manufacturing defect can also come from a problem in the build process, such as using the wrong screw or leaving a screw out. Wiring an electrical part incorrectly can lead to electrocution of the people who use it.

Marketing Defect Claims

A product liability claim can be based on a marketing defect (sometimes called a "failure to warn" claim) when a seller or maker fails to warn users about a product’s dangerous feature. Even a product with no manufacturing or design defect can still be legally defective, although these lawsuits are less common than design and manufacturing defect claims because they turn on how the product is sold and labeled. The elements of a marketing defect claim are:

  • The seller knew about a danger in the product
  • The seller failed to warn users about that danger
  • That failure to warn is connected to the user’s injury

Marketing Defect Case Example

A common failure-to-warn pattern involves a household chemical or appliance that is safe when used as intended but dangerous in a foreseeable way the label never mentions. If the maker knew of the hazard, failed to warn about it, and a user was injured because of that omission, the maker can be liable even if the product itself was designed and built correctly.

Common Causes of Defective-Product Injuries

Most defective-product injuries trace back to a small set of failures: a product built wrong, a product designed in a dangerous way, or a product sold without a warning the user needed. Recalls happen far more often than people realize, and each one is a signal that a defect slipped through.

In a recent year, federal regulators issued more than 300 product-recall announcements covering over 80 million units of hazardous products. Recalled products were still linked to hundreds of injuries and more than a dozen deaths that year, the highest injury total tied to recalled products in eight years.5

Motor-vehicle and auto-part defects account for a large share of this problem and overlap heavily with crash cases. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recorded 1,000 recalls in a recent reporting year for vehicles, car seats, tires, RVs, and other equipment, with nearly 35 million vehicles recalled.6

The clearest example is the Takata airbag recall, the largest and most complex auto safety recall in U.S. history. The agency reports that about 67 million Takata inflators have been recalled across more than 42 million U.S. vehicles. The propellant could break down due to heat, humidity, and age, rupturing the metal inflator and spraying shrapnel into the cabin. The defect has been linked to more than two dozen U.S. deaths and hundreds of U.S. injuries, and the large majority of recalled inflators have since been repaired.7

A recall is not required before you can sue, and a recall does not automatically prove your case. It is one piece of evidence among many. If a defective tire, airbag, or other part contributed to your crash, we can investigate both the part and the driver.

Who Can Be Held Liable

As noted above, Maryland’s strict-liability rule lets you sue anyone in the chain of distribution, not just the manufacturer. You do not have to prove which company was careless, only that the product was in a defective condition not reasonably safe for its intended use when it left that company’s control.

Maryland law also gives a non-manufacturing seller a possible shield, called the sealed container defense. Under Courts and Judicial Proceedings section 5-405, a seller can avoid a design or manufacturing claim if it proves it sold the product sealed or unaltered, did not know about the defect, could not have found it with reasonable care, did not design or specify it, and did not mishandle it.8

That shield has limits. The sealed container defense does not apply if the manufacturer cannot be identified, has been judicially declared insolvent, cannot be served under Maryland law, is immune from suit, or if a court determines the claimant could not enforce a judgment against the manufacturer.8 This is exactly why naming the manufacturer, not just the store, matters for your recovery, and why these cases need a lawyer who will trace the part back to its source.

Damages You Can Recover in a Maryland Product Liability Case

A Maryland product liability case can help you recover compensation for your medical bills, your lost wages, and your pain and suffering. Pain and suffering covers both the physical pain itself and the limitations the injury imposes on your daily life, such as activities you can no longer do and routine tasks that have become harder.

Some costs are not reliably recoverable as standalone damages. In-home care and rides to medical treatment are not standard recoverable line items in Maryland, and insurers commonly push back on them unless they are tied to a doctor’s order and documented as they happen.

Property damage is handled separately from your injury claim. WGK generally does not handle the property-damage side of a claim. Property damage is a separate part of insurance (usually collision coverage) and does not add to a bodily-injury claim. The one exception is a diminished-value claim, where WGK charges 33.3% of the diminished-value recovery.

Punitive damages, which punish a company rather than compensate you, are very hard to get in Maryland. They require proof of "actual malice," an intent to injure. Maryland courts reserve them for intentional misconduct, not ordinary or even gross carelessness, so a routine defective-product case rarely qualifies. We will tell you honestly what your case can and cannot recover.

Maryland Law: Statute of Limitations, Damages Cap, and Negligence

Three Maryland rules shape almost every product liability case:

  • the filing deadline,
  • the damages cap, and
  • the fault rule.

One of them can end your case before it starts, so read this section closely.

How Long Do I Have to File a Product Liability Lawsuit in Maryland?

Maryland’s statute of limitations for a personal-injury product liability claim is three years from when the claim accrues.9 The earlier we get involved, the more time we have to preserve the product, identify the manufacturer in the chain of distribution, and build the proof your case needs.

Many people assume an old product is too late to sue over. A "statute of repose" is a fixed cutoff that ends a claim once a product reaches a certain age, no matter when the injury happened. Section 5-108 of the Maryland Code sets a 20-year outer limit, but it applies only to defective and unsafe conditions of improvements to real property, with specific carve-outs for asbestos exposure.10 A defective-product claim is governed by the three-year accrual clock under section 5-101.

Maryland’s Damages Cap Applies to Product Cases Too

Maryland caps non-economic damages (pain and suffering) in every personal injury case, including product liability cases. There is no carve-out that exempts product cases. The cap sits in the high six-figure range ($965,000 as of the October 2025 adjustment) and rises every October 1. The cap that applies is the one in effect on the date of injury, not the date you file, and juries are not told about the cap at trial.11

Maryland’s Contributory Negligence Rule

Maryland follows a pure contributory negligence rule: a plaintiff who is even 1% at fault for an accident is generally barred from any recovery. In a product case, this is the manufacturer’s main defense, usually arguing that the claimant misused the product or ignored a warning. Under Maryland case law (Myers v. Bright), your conduct must have actually caused the harm, not merely been careless, to bar recovery.14 Maryland is one of a small group of jurisdictions that still applies pure contributory negligence, alongside the District of Columbia and Virginia.

How Manufacturers and Their Insurers Defend Product Cases

Knowing the rules is one thing. Knowing how the other side uses them against you is another. Manufacturers defend these cases with money and experts, and their first move is almost always to argue that you caused your own injury, not the product.

They push that misuse defense hard because it has historically worked. Product-liability cases are among the hardest tort cases to win at trial. Federal data has shown plaintiffs prevailed in only about a third of federal product-liability trials.12 The defense knows those numbers as well as we do, so they spend on engineers, depositions, and motions designed to convince a judge or jury that the user, not the product, was the problem.

That is the point of having a lawyer with resources. The defense will hire engineers to say the product was safe and that you misused it. We answer with our own product testing, analysis, and expert testimony, and we build the evidence that the defect, not your conduct, caused the harm.

Product Liability Case Results

WGK Personal Injury Lawyers has recovered over $100 million for our clients.13 Product-liability results depend heavily on the policy involved, the strength of the defect proof, the injuries, and the liability dispute, so no two cases are alike.

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Every case is different. These figures represent aggregated data from cases handled by our firm and are provided for informational purposes only.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does a Baltimore product liability lawyer cost?

Nothing upfront. WGK works on a contingency basis: the standard fee is 33.3% of the gross recovery if the case resolves before a lawsuit is filed, and 40% if a lawsuit is filed (the fee increases at filing, not at trial). We advance case expenses, so you pay nothing out of pocket to start.

What is my product liability case worth?

There is no average amount because value depends on the specifics: the severity of your injury, your medical bills and future care, your lost income, how strong the proof of the defect is, and how much insurance coverage stands behind the company. A serious injury caused by a clear defect with solid coverage is worth far more than a minor one in dispute. We weigh all of those factors and give you an honest read on what your personal injury case is worth.

What if I no longer have the product that injured me?

It’s harder without the product, but not always hopeless. We can sometimes build the case from purchase records, photographs, your medical records, the product’s recall and complaint history, and proof of which company made it. The sooner you call, the more of that evidence we can preserve or reconstruct, which is why we ask you not to discard anything connected to the injury.

Arrange a Free Consultation With an Experienced Baltimore Product Liability Lawyer

If a defective product hurt you or someone you love, WGK Personal Injury Lawyers is ready to help. We have represented people in Baltimore, Maryland since 1977, and we do not back down from corporations or their insurers.

Your first consultation is free, and we work on contingency, so there’s no fee unless we win. If coming in is difficult, you don’t have to: we handle most of a product liability case by phone and mail your settlement payment to you when the case resolves.

Call (410) 837-2144 now, or visit our Baltimore office at 14 W. Madison Street, Baltimore, MD, to get your free case review. You can also reach us through our online contact form.

Sources

  1. Phipps v. General Motors Corp., 278 Md. 337, 363 A.2d 955 (1976). Maryland Court of Appeals adoption of strict product liability under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A; three theories of recovery and the defect test. University of Baltimore Law Review case note (academic secondary). https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr/vol6/iss2/5/
  2. Halliday v. Sturm, Ruger & Co., 368 Md. 186, 792 A.2d 1145 (2002). Maryland Court of Appeals (Maryland Judiciary). Maryland uses the consumer-expectation test for design defect, with a risk-utility test when a product malfunctions. https://law.justia.com/cases/maryland/court-of-appeals/2002/54a01-1.html
  3. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, About CPSC. Consumer-product incidents cost the United States more than $1 trillion a year; CPSC has safety jurisdiction over thousands of product types. https://www.cpsc.gov/node/12696
  4. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS), 2024. Federal hospital-based consumer-product injury surveillance, operated for more than 45 years. https://www.cpsc.gov/Research–Statistics/NEISS-Injury-Data
  5. U.S. PIRG Education Fund, “Safe At Home in 2025?” analysis of U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recall data, 2024 (reported via Axios). More than 300 recall announcements covering 80M+ units; hundreds of injuries and 15 deaths linked to recalled products, an eight-year high. https://www.axios.com/2025/03/25/recall-consumer-products-fire-hazard-injuries
  6. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2023 Annual Recalls Report. 1,000 recalls issued in 2023 for vehicles, car seats, tires, RVs, and other equipment; nearly 35 million vehicles recalled. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/check-recalls-during-vehicle-safety-recalls-week
  7. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Takata Recall Spotlight, 2024 (figures attributed to NHTSA). Approximately 67 million inflators recalled across 42M+ U.S. vehicles; more than two dozen U.S. deaths and hundreds of U.S. injuries; large majority of inflators repaired by 2024.https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle-safety/takata-recall-spotlight
  8. Maryland General Assembly, Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-405 (sealed container defense in product liability), 2024. https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcj&section=5-405
  9. Maryland General Assembly, Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (three-year personal-injury statute of limitations), 2024. https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/laws/StatuteText?article=gcj&section=5-101
  10. Maryland General Assembly, Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-108 (statute of repose for improvements to real property; asbestos carve-outs), 2024. https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcj&section=5-108
  11. Maryland General Assembly, Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-108 (non-economic damages cap), 2025. The cap applies to all personal injury cases including product liability, is set by the date of injury, and rises each October 1. https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/laws/StatuteText?article=gcj&section=11-108
  12. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics: Federal Tort Trials and Verdicts, 2002-03. (Most recent data published by BJS.) Plaintiff-win rates in federal product-liability trials (approximately one-third). https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/federal-tort-trials-and-verdicts-2002-03
  13. WGK Personal Injury Lawyers first-party firm data, 2026.
  14. Maryland common law (pure contributory negligence; 1% at fault generally bars recovery) and Myers v. Bright (the plaintiff’s negligence must have caused the harm to bar recovery). https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1386287543118301946&q=Myers+v.+Bright,+327+Md.+395,+609+A.2d+1182+(1992)&hl=en&as_sdt=400006&hl=en&as_sdt=400006)