Tyler product injuries come off the heavy equipment and oil field tools that East Texas runs on, machine guards that fail, pressure vessels, drill string components, and off the power tools and vehicles that fail in a garage or roll over on the road. The people hurt by them are taken to UT Health Tyler on South Beckham Avenue, the Level I trauma center, or to CHRISTUS Mother Frances Hospital on East Dawson Street. When the product failed on the road, the Tyler Police Department or the Smith County Sheriff’s Office writes the crash report; when it failed at work, the employer’s incident report is the first record. A Smith County product suit is filed with the Smith County District Clerk at 100 North Broadway for the Smith County District Courts, or in the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, at 211 West Ferguson Street when the case belongs in federal court. Trey Morris Injury Lawyers takes custody of the product and its packaging so the item that failed can be inspected in the condition it was in. We send preservation letters once there is a sound basis for one, because moving as fast as the rules permit helps keep and uncover the evidence a product case depends on. Those letters ask the manufacturer, the seller and, when the failure happened at work, the employer to keep their design and testing files, complaints about the same model, and the maintenance and inspection records for the item; together they show how the product was meant to work, whether the maker knew of the problem, and whether anything else caused the failure.
The law that governs the claim is Texas law, and it is the same in Smith County as in every other county. A Tyler product-injury claim is a two-year filing under CPRC Section 16.003, and a plaintiff whose proportionate responsibility exceeds 50% under CPRC Chapter 33 recovers nothing. Trey Morris Injury Lawyers preserves the product under CPRC Chapter 82 as evidence of the defect.
What Is Product Liability Under Texas Law?
Texas product liability law holds manufacturers, distributors, and sellers legally responsible when a defective product causes injury or death. There are three recognized claim types: design defect, manufacturing defect, and marketing defect (also called failure to warn).
strict liability
A legal standard where the manufacturer is liable for a defective product without the injured person having to prove the manufacturer was negligent. You prove the defect existed and caused the injury. The manufacturer’s care or intent is not the issue.
The most important feature of Texas product liability law is strict liability. You do not need to prove the company was careless. You prove the product was defective and the defect caused your injury.
CPRC
Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. The main statute governing civil lawsuits in Texas, including product liability, proportionate responsibility, and damage caps.
Texas product liability is governed by common law doctrine alongside CPRC Chapter 82. The statute of limitations is two years from the date of injury under CPRC Section 16.003. Miss that deadline and you lose the right to sue, regardless of how serious the injury.
statute of repose
A hard deadline that bars lawsuits after a fixed period from the product’s sale or manufacture, regardless of when the injury was discovered. Unlike a statute of limitations, it cannot be tolled or extended by discovering the injury late.
Texas also has a 15-year statute of repose under CPRC Section 16.012. Products more than 15 years old are generally immune from product liability suits, unless the manufacturer provided an express warranty extending beyond that period.
Design Defect Claims: The Risk-Utility Test
Texas uses the risk-utility test to evaluate whether a product’s design was defective. Every unit made from a flawed design carries the same danger. The defect exists before manufacturing begins.
Texas evaluates design defects using the risk-utility test. Courts weigh the probability and magnitude of foreseeable harm against the burden of adopting a safer alternative design. Under CPRC Section 82.005, a plaintiff must prove a safer alternative design existed. That design would have reduced or eliminated the risk. And the product’s failure to use it made the product unreasonably dangerous.
The consumer expectations test can also apply, particularly for products marketed directly to ordinary consumers. A product is defective if it fails to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when used in a reasonably foreseeable way.
In East Texas, design defect cases frequently arise from heavy equipment and oil field tools. Guarding failures on industrial machinery, pressure vessel designs, and drill string component geometry are recurrent product categories in Smith County litigation. Power tool blade guard failures and vehicle rollover geometry cases also arise regularly.
Evidence in design defect cases centers on engineering analysis, industry safety standards from bodies like ANSI, OSHA, and ISO, and expert testimony from design engineers who can articulate what the safer alternative design would have looked like.
Foreseeable misuse is a key concept. If a user misuses a product in a way the manufacturer could reasonably anticipate, the manufacturer may still be liable. If the misuse was truly unforeseeable, it may break the chain of causation.
Manufacturing Defect Claims
A manufacturing defect is different from a design defect. The design was fine. Something went wrong during production with one specific unit or batch. The defective product differs from what the manufacturer intended to make.
strict liability
A legal standard where the manufacturer is liable for a defective product without the injured person having to prove the manufacturer was negligent. You prove the defect existed and caused the injury. The manufacturer’s care or intent is not the issue.
Strict liability applies fully to manufacturing defects. If the product left the factory in a defective condition and that defect caused injury, the manufacturer is liable. Their quality control procedures, or how carefully they tried, are irrelevant.
Manufacturing defect cases common to East Texas industrial contexts include improperly heat-treated metal components in oilfield equipment, contaminated food or pharmaceutical products, and incorrectly assembled machinery. Batch and lot number records become critical: you need to show the defect existed in the product at the time it left the manufacturer.
The proof framework compares the defective product to the manufacturer’s own design specifications and to other conforming units from the same production run. If your unit deviates from what the company’s own specs required, that deviation is the defect.
Evidence collection here includes quality control records, batch and lot traceability records, failure analysis reports, inspection records, and any recall notices or technical service bulletins the manufacturer issued.
Chain of custody matters. The defense will argue the product was altered or damaged after it left the factory. Document who handled the product, when, and how. Preserve it intact.
spoliation
The destruction or alteration of evidence after a party has a duty to preserve it. Courts can penalize the party who destroyed evidence with an adverse inference instruction, meaning the jury can assume the missing evidence was harmful to that party.
Preserve the product immediately. Spoliation is a serious risk in product liability cases. If you discard, repair, or alter the defective product before it is inspected, the court may issue an adverse inference instruction. The jury will be told they can assume the missing evidence was unfavorable to you.
Failure to Warn (Marketing Defect) Claims
A marketing defect arises when a product that is otherwise safely designed and manufactured causes injury because it lacks adequate warnings or instructions. The product was not inherently dangerous. The user did not know the risk.
The duty to warn attaches to risks that are not obvious to the ordinary user and that the manufacturer knew or should have known about. Warning obvious dangers does not create liability for failing to do so. Warning non-obvious risks is the manufacturer’s obligation.
Texas recognizes a post-sale duty to warn in some circumstances. If a risk emerges from post-sale experience, user reports, or scientific research after the product is sold, the manufacturer may have an ongoing obligation to issue updated warnings. This matters in pharmaceutical and medical device cases where risk profiles evolve after FDA approval.
learned intermediary
A legal doctrine in prescription drug and medical device cases. The manufacturer’s duty to warn runs to the prescribing physician, not directly to the patient. If the physician was adequately warned, the manufacturer generally satisfies its duty even if the patient was not.
The learned intermediary doctrine applies in prescription drug and medical device cases in Texas. The manufacturer’s duty runs to the prescribing physician, not directly to the patient. This can be a significant defense in pharmaceutical failure-to-warn cases.
Industrial chemical warnings in Tyler and East Texas must comply with OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard and ANSI Z535 labeling standards. SDS sheets must be provided. Power equipment manufacturers must include adequate safety labels under applicable ANSI standards. Pharmaceutical products must comply with FDA labeling requirements.
These cases turn on whether an expert can testify that the warning was inadequate by industry standards and that an adequate warning would have changed the outcome.
CPRC Chapter 82: The Innocent Seller Defense
Texas gives retailers and distributors a statutory defense. Under CPRC Section 82.003, a seller who did not manufacture the defective product can be dismissed from the lawsuit if the manufacturer is named as a defendant and is subject to Texas jurisdiction.
This means if you buy a defective product at a Tyler hardware store and the manufacturer is a U.S. company you can sue in Texas, the retailer can get dismissed. The lawsuit proceeds against the manufacturer alone.
But the innocent seller defense has exceptions. A seller loses the protection if it exercised substantial control over the product’s design, formulation, or warnings. A seller also loses it if it modified the product, made express warranties about the product, or had actual knowledge of the defect at the time of sale.
Strategic implications are significant. Always name the full supply chain in the initial lawsuit: manufacturer, component parts suppliers, distributors, and retailers. Let each party establish or lose their defense. If the manufacturer is insolvent, in bankruptcy, or a foreign company beyond Texas jurisdiction, the seller remains a viable defendant.
The innocent seller defense does not protect a component part seller who manufactured the defective component, even if they did not make the final assembled product.
Past results do not guarantee future outcomes; each case is decided on its own facts. See our full case results.
Proportionate Responsibility in Multi-Party Product Cases
proportionate responsibility
Texas’s system for allocating fault among multiple parties. Each party pays only their percentage share of fault, with some exceptions. The plaintiff is barred from recovery if their own share exceeds 50%.
Most product liability cases involve more than one potentially responsible party. Texas proportionate responsibility under CPRC Chapter 33 governs how fault is divided.
The 51% bar applies. At exactly 50% or less, the plaintiff recovers but their damages are reduced by their percentage of fault.
Joint and several liability in Texas is limited. Under CPRC Section 33.013, only defendants whose responsibility exceeds 50% are jointly and severally liable for the entire judgment. Defendants at 50% or less pay only their proportionate share. In multi-defendant cases, this affects how collectible a judgment actually is.
Manufacturers can designate responsible third parties under CPRC Section 33.004. They might designate a distributor, a maintenance contractor, or even the plaintiff. After designation, the plaintiff has 60 days to add the designated third party as a defendant. If you miss that window, you cannot add them later and the manufacturer benefits from the split of fault.
East Texas industrial and oilfield product liability cases routinely involve multiple defendants: the equipment OEM, a component supplier who made the failing part, the maintenance contractor who last serviced the equipment, and potentially the employer. Fault allocation across that group directly determines each defendant’s settlement exposure and leverage.
Understanding each defendant’s maximum proportionate exposure is core to settlement strategy. An attorney who does not model the fault allocation across defendants before entering mediation is going in unprepared.
Your Tyler Injury Attorneys
Founder Trey Morris leads every injury case the firm takes.
Exemplary Damages for Gross Negligence
Texas allows exemplary damages in product liability cases when the plaintiff proves, by clear and convincing evidence, that the manufacturer acted with gross negligence under CPRC Chapter 41. This applies when a manufacturer knew about a defect and chose not to fix it.
Texas calls these exemplary damages, not punitive damages.
Gross negligence requires two elements. The objective prong: an act or omission involving an extreme degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of harm to others. The subjective prong: the defendant had actual subjective awareness of the risk but proceeded with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others.
The cap under CPRC Section 41.008 is the greater of (a) two times economic damages plus noneconomic damages up to $750,000, or (b) $200,000. The cap does not apply to certain felony-level conduct including murder, aggravated assault, and sexual assault.
In product liability, exemplary damages become available when internal company documents show the manufacturer knew about the defect. Recall suppression decisions, internal engineering memos weighing fix cost against litigation exposure, and consumer complaint databases are the evidence that transforms a compensatory claim into an exemplary damages claim.
Texas requires bifurcated trials when exemplary damages are sought. The jury first decides liability and compensatory damages. Then, in a separate phase, they hear evidence on gross negligence and determine exemplary damages.
Class Actions and MDL in Product Liability
When a defective product injures many people across the country, individual cases do not stay individual for long.
MDL
Multidistrict Litigation. A federal procedure that consolidates similar cases from across the country before a single judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings. Individual cases retain their identity but share discovery and pretrial rulings. Bellwether trials set the settlement value for the group.
MDL proceedings at the federal level consolidate thousands of similar cases for pretrial coordination. The Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division at 211 W. Ferguson Street handles federal MDL and diversity cases from Smith County. The Eastern District has historically produced plaintiff-favorable jury pools.
State-level class actions in Tyler are filed in the Smith County District Courts, which include the 125th, 114th, 321st, and 7th Judicial District Courts.
bellwether
In MDL litigation, bellwether trials are early individual cases selected to go to trial first. Their outcomes calibrate the settlement value for thousands of similar cases waiting in the MDL queue.
Mass tort MDLs arise most often in pharmaceutical drug cases, medical device cases, and consumer product categories where a nationwide defect pattern is established. Bellwether trials in MDL proceedings establish the settlement range for remaining cases.
For individuals with serious injuries, opting into a mass settlement versus pursuing an individual claim requires careful analysis. Class settlements distribute compensation across thousands of plaintiffs and often produce smaller individual recoveries. Plaintiffs with severe injuries and strong individual facts frequently do better outside the class.
Whether an injury is better suited to individual litigation or mass tort participation depends on the injury severity, the damages, and the defendant’s available resources.
What clients say
- ★★★★★
Where should I start!?
Trey Morris Injury Law Firm was a great fit for me! During this wild time of getting into a car wreck, dealing with insurance, and other third parties, Mrs. Brooke and Mrs. Nerren were extremely helpful! They were there for me through the whole process and never once did I doubt their professionalism. They will fight tooth and nail for you and get you what you deserve. I would recommend them to anyone.
- ★★★★★
Trey Morris what a great experience if I ever have to suggest a lawyer's office Morris is my first choice will be suggesting to friends and family
- ★★★★★
Very professional and very easy to work with throughout the whole case!
Lane and Men helped make the whole process go smonthly with no stress
- ★★★★★
Great experience overall.
Seth and Jessica were always there to help and I could tell they truly had my best interest in mind. I was overwhelmed after my incident and they walked me through every step of the way and provided a lot of relief.
- ★★★★★
I hired [Trey Morris Injury Lawyers] to represent me with my case.
Mr. Lane Robinson, Jessica, and Yadira has been with me every step of the way, making sure I received the proper care I needed to get well. They always called emailed and text to make sure I was doing OK. I would recommend the firm to anyone. They have an amazing team. I couldn’t have made a better choice. Thank you all for everything you have done for me and my family.
- ★★★★★
I just want to express how pleased I am with [Trey Morris Injury Lawyers].
Their caring team made a huge difference in my experience. From the moment I reached out, they were attentive and supportive, guiding me through every step of the process. They truly took the time to listen to my concerns and made me feel valued as a client. I highly recommend their services to anyone in need of a compassionate and dedicated legal team!
Testimonials do not constitute a guarantee, warranty, or prediction regarding the outcome of your legal matter. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
What Happens After You File a Product Liability Claim in Tyler?
Product liability cases have a specific sequence. Knowing it helps you protect your rights from the first day.
Step one: preserve the product. Do not throw it away, repair it, or allow the retailer to take it back. Keep all packaging, instruction manuals, and receipts. The product is your primary evidence.
Step two: seek medical treatment and connect the injury to the product. Documentation of what you were doing with the product and how the injury occurred should be recorded as close in time to the incident as possible.
Step three: consult a product liability attorney before speaking with the manufacturer’s insurer. The insurer will contact you. Do not give a recorded statement. Do not send the product to them for inspection without your attorney arranging independent preservation first.
State claims are filed in the Smith County District Court in Tyler. Federal diversity cases go to the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division at 211 W. Ferguson Street.
Before filing, an experienced attorney hires a liability expert to inspect the product. That inspection shapes the theory of the case and determines which defect category applies. Filing without an expert opinion is a mistake. Once litigation starts, discovery targets quality control records, internal communications, prior consumer complaints, and any recall history. The manufacturer’s insurer will simultaneously conduct its own investigation to minimize exposure.
Texas product liability cases typically take 18 to 36 months from filing to resolution. Complex multi-defendant cases or those involving MDL coordination take longer. Trey Morris Injury Lawyers handles the entire process: expert retention, pre-suit investigation, discovery, and through trial if necessary.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long do I have to file a product liability lawsuit in Texas?
What is the 15-year statute of repose and does it affect my case?
Can I sue a retailer for a defective product in Texas?
What is the difference between a design defect and a manufacturing defect?
Do I need to keep the defective product?
What if I was partially at fault for my injury?
Can I still file a claim if the product was recalled?
What damages can I recover in a Texas product liability case?
Do I need a lawyer to handle a product liability case, or can I negotiate with the manufacturer myself?
Last updated October 7, 2026