FREE CASE CONSULTATION
312-622-2900
Facebook-f Linkedin Google Instagram

Products Liability Attorney in North Pekin

Let Carlson Bier Fight For You

Over $50 Million in Recoveries

5-Star Advanced Local Service Ads For Carlson Bier
Find Out if You Have a Case in 10 Seconds
Jeff Bier – Personal Injury Lawyer At Carlson Bier Associates
Personal Injury Lawyer Orland Park Illinois | Carlson Bier Associates

About Carlson Bier Associates

With vast experience in tackling complex product liability cases, Carlson Bier is your ultimate safeguard against misfortune brought on by defective or dangerous consumer items. Steadfast and relentless in pursuit of justice for our clients, we meticulously dissect each case to establish fault effectively. We act as an unwavering shield protecting clients from North Pekin and beyond who have been harmed by faulty products. At Carlson Bier, our pride lies not merely in battling legal battles but ensuring that manufacturers take responsibility and rectify these faults to ensure public safety. Products liability law is a specialized area where dedication, expertise, and understanding matter greatly – traits embedded deeply within all members of the Carlson Bier team dedicated to serving you tirelessly every step of the way. Whatever your products liability needs are – be it a failed medical device or unsafe toys – trust none other than the reputed experts at Illinois-based Carlson Bier to address them with unswerving commitment and legal proficiency.

Meet Our Attorneys
About Carlson Bier

Products Liability Lawyers in North Pekin Illinois

At Carlson Bier, we champion the rights of individuals who have been injured as a result of defective or dangerous products. Situated in Illinois, our law firm specializes in personal injury cases with an emphasis on Products Liability. The complexity of such cases calls for adept legal advice and comprehensive understanding of both state and federal laws that govern liability issues.

Products Liability refers to the responsibility borne by manufacturers, distributors, suppliers or retailers over injuries caused by their products. A grave defect in a product can cause harm – sometimes life-threatening – to consumers, resulting in a Products Liability case. This occurs when the designed product fails to meet consumer expectations about safety standards and contains dangers unknown to them.

There are three major types of defects that could potentially instigate a Product Liability lawsuit:

• Design Defects: When an intrinsic design flaw makes the product inherently harmful even before production.

• Manufacturing Defects: Occurs during assembly/production process when an otherwise safe product becomes hazardous due to flawed manufacturing.

• Marketing/Cautionary Defects: These involve insufficient instructions or lack of sufficient warnings that could lead to misuse and consequent damage.

Illinois follows the strict liability rule wherein plaintiffs don’t necessarily need to prove negligence on part of manufacturer but rather focus on proving that the defective product caused harm due to one or more defects aforementioned.

Navigating through this complex landscape requires expert assistance which is where Carlson Bier’s proficiency lies. Our team’s unparalleled expertise masks its depth beneath simplicity, enabling us extract pertinent details from complicated intricacies associated with countless hours spent examining blueprints/schematics or analyzing labels/warnings while still keeping you abreast with each step taken towards resolution.

Our experienced personal injury attorneys strive tirelessly fighting for clients’ rights after they’ve suffered harm as result multiple factors including faulty medical devices, automobile defects, children’s toys/equipment malfunctioning among others.

Over years Carlson Bier boasts victorious representation numerous individuals handing them compensation they justly deserve, which includes covering medical bills, lost wages, as well pain suffering. Here’s brief look at accomplishments:

• Accrue a high success rate in favor of plaintiffs regardless of type/complexity involved

• Comprehensive inspection of product history and features to pinpoint the defect

• Diligent documentation highlighting communication with manufacturer, photographic evidence etc. supporting your case effusively

• Timely response adhering strict statutes limitations avoiding any potential barriers towards justice.

At Carlson Bier we believe prioritizing client over everything keeps us attuned to their needs providing them superior service tailored individually for each one. As assertive advocates victims’ rights presenting formidable arguments against liable parties pursuit truth – integrity, perseverance knowledge form backbone our legal approach.

Considering that every case is unique with its own set of complexities, it requires comprehensive understanding and a strategic approach finely honed by decades-long experience which our lawyers proficiently provide.

Lastly, remember that time is often critical in personal injury cases. Waiting too long may render crucial evidence unavailable or even extinguish your right to sue. Reach out to us sooner rather than later so we can start working on your claim immediately.

We value the trust clients place upon us are all always ready listen guide through this tumultuous journey towards seeking justice while alleviating burden off their shoulders whenever possible treat each case if were our fight knowing fully well importance lies within victory.

Feel confident about taking the next steps toward resolution and justice today when you click the button below. Learn more about what your case might be worth and understand how Carlson Bier can offer seasoned advocacy during this challenging time based upon years of cumulative experience and legal insights into Products Liability laws in Illinois.

Find Out How Much Your Case is Worth
Testimonials from Clients

Your Success Is Our Success

Notable Illinois Appellate Wins

Moruzzi v. CCC Servs., Inc., 2020 IL App (2d) 190411, 171 N.E.3d 61
Background: Insured motorist filed action against insurer for declaratory judgment seeking construction of automobile insurance policy issued to insured and that was in effect when insured was injured by an underinsured driver. The Circuit Court, DuPage County, Bonnie M. Wheaton, J., granted the insurer's motions for summary judgment. Insured appealed.Holdings: The Appellate Court, Zenoff, J., held that:1 medical payments reduction clause in automobile insurance policy conflicted with underinsured motorist provisions so as to render reduction clause ambiguous, and thus medical payment benefits were deductible from insured's damages;2 law firm representing insured did not create common fund or common funds when it reached settlement with underinsured motorist, and thus law firm was not entitled to recover fees under common-fund doctrine; and3 collateral estoppel did not bar automobile insurers from litigating whether common-fund doctrine applied in insured motorist's declaratory judgment action.Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Maier v. CC Servs., Inc., 2019 IL App (3d) 170640, 132 N.E.3d 795
Background: After insured, who was injured in automobile collision with another driver, recovered full liability limits of driver's policy, she filed amended complaint for declaratory judgment against her own automobile insurer, alleging that insurer breached contractual duty to pay for insured's damages in accordance with uninsured/underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in insured's policy and that insurer acted in bad faith in denying insured such coverage. The Circuit Court, La Salle County, Troy D. Holland, J., granted the insurer's motion to dismiss claims as time-barred. Insured appealed.The Appellate Court ruled that neither the insurer nor the insured could add amended policy provisions to the court record. It was decided that the policy's requirement for a written arbitration demand applied to both uninsured and underinsured motorist claims. The court found that a letter from the insured's attorney to the insurer wasn't a valid arbitration demand nor a proof of loss to toll the statute of limitations. Finally, the insurer was permitted to use the defense based on the two-year statute of limitations period. The court's decision was affirmed.
Econ. Premier Assurance Co. v. Country Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 IL App (1st) 192364-U
Holding: The circuit court's order that granted defendant's motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment was proper where defendant had no duty to indemnify its insured with respect to the underlying complaint and therefore plaintiff was not entitled to recover against defendant on its subrogation or unjust enrichment claims; affirmed.
Country Preferred Ins. Co. v. Westerheide, 2023 IL App (5th) 220343-U
Holding: The court affirmed judgment of the circuit court granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff where the defendant failed to make a written demand for arbitration within two years from the date of the accident as required by the underinsured provisions of the defendant's automotive insurance policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Olsak, 2022 IL App (1st) 200695, 216 N.E.3d 291
In a complex legal case, an insurer sought to avoid defending or indemnifying a hockey player under a policy issued to the player's stepfather after the player was sued for assaulting his coach. The initial Circuit Court ruling favored the insurer, but the Appellate Court reversed this decision, leading to a protracted legal battle. Ultimately, the Appellate Court determined the insurer was liable only up to the $3 million policy limit and found the insurer's four-year delay in seeking a declaratory judgment to be reasonable. This case highlights important aspects of insurance litigation and policy limit liabilities.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Durkin Elec. Co., Inc., 2022 IL App (1st) 210293-U, appeal denied, 199 N.E.3d 1187 (Ill. 2022)
Holding: The circuit court's order that denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment and found that defendant was an additional insured under the policy was proper. The circuit court's order that denied defendant's motion for summary judgment and found that plaintiff did not have a duty to defend or indemnify defendant under the policy was proper; affirmed.
Country Preferred Ins. Co. v. Groen, 2017 IL App (4th) 160028, 69 N.E.3d 911
Background: Uninsured motorist (UM) carrier brought action against insured for declaratory judgment that it owed no benefits since workers' compensation received by insured exceeded policy limits. The Circuit Court, Sangamon County, Chris Perrin, J., entered summary judgment in favor of the carrier. Insured appealed.Holdings: The Appellate Court, Harris, J., held that:1 employer's medical payments entitled carrier to setoff, and2 setoff clauses were enforceable.Affirmed.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Frobish, 2021 IL App (3d) 190473-U
Holding: Allegations in the underlying complaint that a township employee caused property damage by excavating and digging out a ditch failed to impose a duty to defend under township employee's individual farm insurance policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Jones, 2018 IL App (1st) 173154-U
Holding: The judgment of the circuit court of Cook County is affirmed; plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against the underlying complaint because the loss claimed in the underlying complaint is subject to an exclusion. The court held that it would also enter judgment for plaintiff because the underlying complaint does not allege an “occurrence” causing bodily injury within the meaning of the policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Schmitt, 2021 IL App (5th) 190173-U
Holding: The appellate court reversed and remanded the judgment of the circuit court where plaintiff had no duty to defend its insured and thus was not stopped from raising policy defenses to coverage for the underlying tort action contained in the amended declaratory action.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Livorsi Marine, Inc., 222 Ill. 2d 303, 856 N.E.2d 338 (2006) (the late Keith Carlson)
Liability insurer brought action against insureds for a declaratory judgment based on failure to provide timely notice of lawsuits against them. The Circuit Court, Cook County, Stephen A. Schiller, J., entered judgment for the insurer. Insureds appealed. The Appellate Court, Wolfson, J., 358 Ill.App.3d 880, 295 Ill.Dec. 665, 833 N.E.2d 871, affirmed. Leave to appeal was granted.Holdings: The Supreme Court, Garman, J., held that:1 if the insurer did not receive reasonable notice of an occurrence or a lawsuit, the policyholder may not recover under the policy, regardless of whether the lack of reasonable notice prejudiced the insurer, overruling Rice v. AAA Aerostar, Inc., 294 Ill.App.3d 801, 229 Ill.Dec. 20, 690 N.E.2d 1067, and Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Baur's Opera House, Inc., 296 Ill.App.3d 1011, 230 Ill.Dec. 624, 694 N.E.2d 593, and2 insured did not need to prove that it was prejudiced by delayed notice of lawsuits.Affirmed.
Education & Information

Resources For North Pekin Residents

Links

Legal Associations and Lawyer Services

Online Legal Resources and Directories

Specialized Services and Educational Resources

Legal Blogs
SEE MORE

Frequently Asked Questions

Product Liability FAQ​

Product liability is the legal responsibility of manufacturers, distributors, sellers, and suppliers for injuries caused by defective products.

The three main types of product liability claims are:

  • Manufacturing defects: These defects occur during the manufacturing process and cause the product to be unsafe.
  • Design defects: These defects exist in the design of the product and make it inherently unsafe.
  • Marketing defects: These defects occur when the manufacturer or seller fails to adequately warn consumers about the dangers of the product.

The signs and symptoms of a product liability injury can vary depending on the type of product that caused the injury. However, some common signs and symptoms include:

  • Physical injuries: These could include cuts, bruises, burns, fractures, and other injuries.
  • Property damage: This could include damage to your home, car, or other belongings.
  • Economic losses: These could include lost wages, medical expenses, and other financial losses.

The treatment options for product liability injuries will vary depending on the severity of the injuries. However, some common treatment options include:

  • Surgery: Surgery may be required to repair injuries that were caused by a defective product.
  • Physical therapy: Physical therapy may be required to help patients regain their strength and mobility after suffering an injury.
  • Occupational therapy: Occupational therapy may be required to help patients learn to perform activities of daily living after suffering an injury.
  • Medications: Medications may be required to treat pain and other symptoms of product liability injuries.

Yes, you may be able to file a lawsuit for a product liability injury if you have been injured due to a defective product. A product liability lawyer can help you understand your rights and options, and can represent you in court if necessary.

All Attorney Services in North Pekin

Areas of Practice in North Pekin

Bicycle Accidents

Expert in legal services for victims injured in bicycle accidents due to negligent parties' carelessness or hazardous conditions.

Flame Traumas

Supplying skilled legal assistance for sufferers of severe burn injuries caused by incidents or recklessness.

Healthcare Malpractice

Providing specialist legal support for individuals affected by clinical malpractice, including surgical errors.

Products Obligation

Managing cases involving unsafe products, providing specialist legal help to victims affected by defective items.

Senior Abuse

Advocating for the rights of nursing home residents who have been subjected to malpractice in care facilities environments, ensuring restitution.

Trip & Fall Incidents

Specialist in managing fall and trip accident cases, providing legal assistance to persons seeking restitution for their suffering.

Neonatal Wounds

Extending legal support for kin affected by medical incompetence resulting in infant injuries.

Motor Collisions

Mishaps: Committed to supporting victims of car accidents get reasonable remuneration for damages and impairment.

Motorbike Mishaps

Expert in providing representation for riders involved in bike accidents, ensuring justice for losses.

Big Rig Crash

Delivering expert legal support for persons involved in semi accidents, focusing on securing rightful claims for injuries.

Construction Collisions

Focused on representing laborers or bystanders injured in construction site accidents due to recklessness or carelessness.

Cerebral Traumas

Specializing in offering compassionate legal advice for persons suffering from head injuries due to negligence.

Dog Bite Damages

Proficient in addressing cases for clients who have suffered wounds from K9 assaults or animal attacks.

Pedestrian Accidents

Focused on legal support for walkers involved in accidents, providing effective representation for recovering claims.

Undeserved Demise

Advocating for bereaved affected by a wrongful death, extending understanding and experienced legal assistance to ensure restitution.

Neural Harm

Focused on assisting persons with spine impairments, offering specialized legal guidance to secure compensation.

Instant Case Evaluation

Contact Us Today if you need a Person Injury Lawyer

312-313-2440