3 Myths About Choosing Winning Product Liability Cases


Myth #3


Dr. Arthur Eckstat

Product Liability Attorney Consultant
(https://www.linkedin.com/in/lawsuitsconsultant) (www.lawsuitsconsultant.com)

How to Choose Winning Contingency Fee Product Liability Cases

Choosing winning contingency fee product liability cases ensures a positive return on your investments of time, effort and money. Winning also enhances your reputation, enabling you to get and win more cases for more money in less time. Choosing the wrong cases drains your resources with no return and worse.

This is the third in a series of articles examining three of the top myths that often lead to mistakenly taking on a seemingly good case that turns out to be a loser in multiple ways.

The first article examined Myth #1: An injured party with a good story makes for a good product liability lawsuit. We looked at 3 common reasons that trial attorneys inadvertently accept losing product liability cases.

Click Here to Read Myth #1 Article

The second article examined Myth #2: You can always substantiate “obvious” negligence. We looked at multiple ways that defendants can hide the truth.

Click Here to Read Myth #2 Article

Myth #3: I don’t need (or can’t afford) an expert to assist me in deciding whether or not I’m taking on a winning product liability case.

This myth can be the most damaging. Believing you don’t need an expert to assist you in deciding whether or not to take on a product liability case hurts you because you can unknowingly waste considerable time and money taking on an unwinnable or vastly underperforming case.

The Reality: The combination of your legal expertise and the technical expertise of the right product liability consultant is often required to determine whether you’re choosing, crafting and conducting a winning or losing product liability case.

The first two articles in this series identified and examined the following potential hazards involved in choosing to accept a case where you can’t prevail, or you have to settle for a much lower amount than warranted:

You haven’t correctly identified the actual or proximate cause of the injury

  • Were the prospective client’s injuries incurred due to a defective and unreasonably dangerous product that the manufacturer was negligent in producing?
  • Were the injuries really the prospective client’s own fault and they’re just not taking responsibility for their mistake?
  • Have you correctly identified an action or inaction on the part of the defendant that produced the foreseeable consequences?

Your inability to substantiate negligence on the part of the defendant(s)

  • Opposing Expert Witnesses can include “Hired Guns”
  • Testifying employees can be afraid of losing their jobs and benefits if they are forthright
  • Obfuscation can include burying relevant discovery responses in boxes of irrelevant discovery information that could overwhelm you
  • Removal of damaging documentation from the records
    Failure to fully respond to interrogatories
  • Improper interrogatory responses can include ignoring questions, claiming information doesn’t exist, and hiding behind claims of “proprietary” information
  • Claiming off-shore information isn’t unavailable or doesn’t exist
  • It is often difficult to impossible to obtain the documentation needed to prevail if the failed part was manufactured outside of the USA by a foreign company.

The same deep-pockets defendant(s) that have the funds that make this appear to be a desirable case may also have the resources to bury you in costly delays and obfuscations

  • If prevailing in your lawsuit could result in a public warning or a product recall, the named defendant(s) may use any means possible to avoid the attendant high costs and negative Public Relations.
  • Beware of defendants who have a reputation for “vigorous” defense tactics
  • Beware of defendants who have a history of injuries without meaningful recompense

Failure to identify the technical reasons for injuries can result in filing a losing complaint in what should have been a winning case.

I often witness how the failure to adequately assess a potential case results in the acceptance of losing cases or the filing of less effective, or ineffective, complaints that fail to provide appropriate, if any, justice for your injured clients.

I am regularly contacted by attorneys after it’s too late to help them.

Example: I was one of the experts contacted to support a case that was subsequently a subject of a Mythbusters episode where an individual lost their thumb firing a high power revolver. I explained why I couldn’t support the plaintiff’s case despite the horrific injuries, and I declined the invitation to be involved. I heard that the case was dismissed years later. How much time, money and lost opportunity were expended in that losing effort?

Having the right Consultant available during or after the initial client interview may ensure that a good case is accepted and initiated in the most effective and efficient manner. Consulting or Testifying Experts who can assist in crafting and supporting the best complaint can be identified. The initial Lawsuit Consultant may be a desirable choice to serve as a retained Consulting or Testifying Expert in the matter.

It costs just as much to lose a contingency fee case as it costs to win the case. You only get to recover those costs if you prevail!

Inadvertently taking on a losing case will result in incurring the loss of all of your actual costs plus the lost opportunity of your time while also suffering the negative effects upon your reputation and the associated reduction in the ability to obtain quality future business. Engaging the services of a product liability Lawsuit Consultant to assist in determining whether or not to accept a potential product liability case can either save you or make you a lot of money and so much more.


Bonus Tip: To learn more about how to choose winning product liability cases and avoid the losers, download your complimentary Guidebook, “7 Keys to Winning More Cases for More Money!” at www.lawsuitsconsultant.com.

Click here to download your complimentary Guidebook.


Attorneys and other legal professionals may apply for a Complimentary No Obligation Consultation with me where we will explore ways to enhance your firm’s capability of Choosing, Crafting and Conducting Winning Cases while Avoiding the Losing Cases at www.lawsuitsconsultant.com.


If you need immediate help with a pending or ongoing case, call me directly at 602.670.9651 or email me at Art@LawsuitsConsultant.com.


I perform a one-on-one personal telephone and/or email case merit evaluation with you. We discuss the merits and/or Red Flags involved in choosing whether or not to accept or continue to pursue your product liability personal injury case.

The Case Merit Evaluation can allow you to make the best use of your time and make or save you money!

Your Case Merit Evaluation investment is only $1997.

Your $1997 investment will be applied toward additional consulting fees if deeper case investigation or case support is desired.

Call, email or go to my website to initiate your Case Merit Evaluation:

Phone: 602-670-9651
Email: Art@LawsuitsConsultant.com
Website: www.LawsuitsConsultant.com


Lawsuit Consultant
Dr. Arthur Eckstat

 Download PDF of Myth 3

YOUR SECRET WEAPON for Winning Cases
and Getting Justice for Your Clients

STATE BAR OF ARIZONA CLE Snippet by Dr. Eckstat:

The State Bar of Arizona partnered with me to produce a CLE Snippet where I present “How to Avoid Losing Cases and Get Winners.” You may access this presentation for 0.25 hour CLE credit at


Copyright © 2016-2017 Arthur Eckstat | All Rights Reserved Frontier Theme