Products Liability: Ohio vs. Michigan

In Ohio, products liability is generally governed by Ohio Revised Code Section 2307, which adopts a strict liability framework for defective products while also permitting negligence and breach of warranty claims. To establish liability, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the product was defective at the time it left the defendant’s control, leading to an injury while the product was being used in a manner expected by the manufacturer. Ohio courts recognize three primary types of product defects: design defects, manufacturing defects, and failure to provide adequate warnings or instructions. The emphasis tends to be on the 'consumer expectation' standard for determining defectiveness, which examines whether a product meets the expectations of an average user.

In Michigan, products liability law follows a slightly different path as outlined in the Michigan Product Liability Act. Similar to Ohio, Michigan recognizes strict liability, but it also necessitates that the plaintiff prove that the defect caused a reasonably foreseeable risk of injury—therefore placing a heavier burden on the plaintiffs regarding the establishment of causation. Michigan law differentiates itself with its focus on the privity of contract and has a more nuanced interpretation of 'defect' as it can cover issues ranging from design errors to the failure of adequate warnings. Additionally, Michigan allows for a comparative fault defense, meaning that a plaintiff's own negligence can impact recovery in products liability cases, which is less prevalent in Ohio’s approach.