DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - PRODUCTS LIABILITY

STATE OF NEW JERSEY

[FIRM NAME]
Attorneys at Law
[Street Address]
[City, New Jersey ZIP]
Telephone: [Phone]
Facsimile: [Fax]
Email: [Email]
Licensed in the State of New Jersey

DATE: [Date]

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND FIRST-CLASS MAIL

[General Counsel / Risk Management / Claims Representative]
[Manufacturer / Distributor / Retailer Name]
[Street Address]
[City, State ZIP]

RE: PRODUCTS LIABILITY CLAIM - SETTLEMENT DEMAND
Claimant: [Client Full Name]
Date of Incident: [Date]
Product: [Product Name, Model Number, Serial Number]
Manufacturer: [Manufacturer Name]
Purchase Date/Location: [Date / Retailer Name]
Claim Number: [If assigned]

Dear [Recipient Name]:

This firm represents [Client Name] in connection with serious personal injuries caused by a defective [Product Name] designed, manufactured, distributed, and/or sold by your company. This letter constitutes our formal demand for settlement under the New Jersey Products Liability Act, N.J. Stat. Ann. Sections 2A:58C-1 to -11.

I. NEW JERSEY PRODUCTS LIABILITY LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Governing Law

New Jersey products liability claims are governed by the New Jersey Products Liability Act (NJPLA), N.J. Stat. Ann. Sections 2A:58C-1 to -11. The NJPLA provides that a manufacturer or seller of a product is liable for harm caused by a product that is not reasonably fit, suitable, or safe for its intended or reasonably foreseeable purposes. N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:58C-2.

B. Statute of Limitations

Under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:14-2, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims, including products liability, is two (2) years from the date of injury. This claim arises from an incident that occurred on [Date], and therefore the limitations period expires on [Expiration Date].

New Jersey applies the discovery rule, which may toll the statute of limitations until the injured party knew or reasonably should have known of the injury and its cause. Lopez v. Swyer, 62 N.J. 267 (1973).

C. Statute of Repose

New Jersey does not have a statute of repose for products liability claims.

D. Theories of Liability Under New Jersey Law

New Jersey recognizes the following theories of products liability:

1. Strict Products Liability:

Under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:58C-2, a manufacturer or seller is strictly liable for harm caused by a product that is "not reasonably fit, suitable or safe for its intended or reasonably foreseeable purposes." New Jersey follows the risk-utility analysis for design defect claims. Dewey v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 121 N.J. 69 (1990).

2. Manufacturing Defect:

A manufacturing defect exists when the product departs from its intended design, rendering it unreasonably dangerous. The product is measured against the manufacturer's own specifications.

3. Design Defect:

New Jersey applies the risk-utility test for design defect claims. Under this analysis, a product is defective in design if the risk of danger inherent in the design outweighs the benefits of that design. O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169 (1983).

The relevant factors include:
- The usefulness and desirability of the product
- The availability of safer substitute products
- The likelihood and severity of injury
- The avoidability of danger through proper care
- The user's ability to avoid danger
- The user's anticipated awareness of the danger
- The feasibility of spreading the risk through pricing or insurance

4. Failure to Warn:

Under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:58C-4, a product is defective if the manufacturer knew or should have known of the danger and failed to provide adequate warning. The warning must be reasonable under the circumstances.

5. Negligence:

In addition to strict liability, New Jersey recognizes negligence claims against manufacturers and sellers for failure to exercise reasonable care in design, manufacture, testing, inspection, and warnings.

6. Breach of Warranty:

New Jersey recognizes claims for breach of express warranty, implied warranty of merchantability (N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 12A:2-314), and implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose (N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 12A:2-315).

E. Comparative Fault

New Jersey follows modified comparative negligence under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:15-5.1. A plaintiff's recovery is reduced by their percentage of fault. However, if the plaintiff's negligence exceeds that of all defendants combined (50% bar rule), recovery is barred entirely.

Our client bears no responsibility for this incident and was using the product in a reasonably foreseeable manner.

F. Punitive Damages

Punitive damages are available in New Jersey products liability cases where the plaintiff proves by clear and convincing evidence that the harm was the result of actual malice or wanton and willful disregard for the safety of others. N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:15-5.12.

Punitive damages are capped at the greater of $350,000 or five times the compensatory damages. N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:15-5.14.

II. PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE - CRITICAL NOTICE

YOU ARE HEREBY DIRECTED TO IMMEDIATELY PRESERVE ALL EVIDENCE relating to this product and claim, including but not limited to:

Product-Related:
- The subject product and all component parts
- Design documents, specifications, and engineering drawings
- Manufacturing records and quality control data
- Testing data and safety assessments
- All versions of warnings, labels, and instructions
- Marketing and advertising materials

Regulatory and Compliance:
- Communications with CPSC, FDA, or other regulatory agencies
- Recall notices and service bulletins
- Adverse event reports and consumer complaints

Claims History:
- Prior claims and lawsuits involving this product
- Prior complaints regarding similar defects

New Jersey recognizes spoliation claims. Rosenblit v. Zimmerman, 166 N.J. 391 (2001). Destruction or alteration of evidence may result in adverse inferences, sanctions, and independent tort liability.

III. THE DEFECTIVE PRODUCT

A. Product Identification

B. Chain of Distribution

The following entities are in the chain of distribution and may bear joint and several liability under New Jersey law:

IV. THE DEFECT

A. Nature of Defect

[DESIGN DEFECT / MANUFACTURING DEFECT / FAILURE TO WARN - Select applicable]

[Detailed description of the defect]:

The [Product Name] is defective because [describe specific defect]. This defect rendered the product not reasonably fit, suitable, or safe for its intended or reasonably foreseeable purposes under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:58C-2.

Risk-Utility Analysis (For Design Defects):

Under the risk-utility test applied in New Jersey, this design is defective because:

• The risk of [describe danger] outweighs any utility of the challenged design feature
• Feasible alternative designs existed that would have prevented the injury
• The alternative design would not have significantly impaired the product's utility
• The danger was not open and obvious to users
• [Additional risk-utility factors]

B. Alternative Safer Design

A feasible alternative design existed at the time of manufacture:

[Describe the alternative safer design that would have prevented injury]

This alternative design was:
- Technologically feasible
- Economically feasible
- Used by competitors or in subsequent models
- Would have prevented our client's injury

V. THE INCIDENT

A. How the Injury Occurred

On [Date], at approximately [Time], our client was [describe activity]:

[Detailed narrative of the incident]

B. Foreseeable Use

Our client was using the product in a manner that was intended or reasonably foreseeable by the manufacturer. Under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:58C-2, a manufacturer is liable for injuries resulting from reasonably foreseeable uses, not just intended uses.

C. Causation

The defect in the [Product Name] was the direct and proximate cause of our client's injuries under New Jersey law. Coffman v. Keene Corp., 133 N.J. 581 (1993).

VI. PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF DEFECT

[If applicable - strengthens claim and supports punitive damages]

Your company knew or should have known of this defect prior to our client's injury:

• [Number] prior complaints regarding this defect
• [Number] prior injuries caused by this defect
• [Recall or service bulletin information]
• [Regulatory correspondence]
• Internal documents acknowledging the defect

This prior knowledge is relevant to punitive damages under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:15-5.12.

VII. INJURIES AND DAMAGES

A. Injuries Sustained

As a direct and proximate result of the defective product, our client sustained the following injuries:

• [Injury 1]
• [Injury 2]
• [Injury 3]
• [Permanent conditions, if any]

B. Medical Treatment

Emergency Treatment:
- Date: [Date]
- Facility: [Hospital Name]
- Treatment: [Description]

Surgical Treatment:
- Date(s): [Dates]
- Procedures: [Description]

Ongoing Treatment:
- [Current treatment needs]

C. Damages Summary

D. Punitive Damages

[If applicable:]

Your company's conduct demonstrates wanton and willful disregard for consumer safety, warranting punitive damages under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:15-5.12. We reserve the right to seek punitive damages up to the statutory cap (greater of $350,000 or five times compensatory damages).

VIII. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

A. Demand Amount

Based upon the clear liability under the New Jersey Products Liability Act, the severity of our client's injuries, and the substantial damages incurred, we hereby demand:

$[DEMAND AMOUNT]

B. Time for Response

This demand will remain open for forty-five (45) days from the date of this letter, expiring on [Expiration Date].

IX. DOCUMENTATION ENCLOSED

• Medical records and bills
• Photographs of the defective product
• Photographs of injuries
• Employment and wage records
• Expert reports (if available)
• Recall notices or safety bulletins (if applicable)
• [Other relevant documentation]

X. CONCLUSION

This case involves a defective product that caused serious injuries to an innocent consumer using the product in a foreseeable manner. Under the New Jersey Products Liability Act, your company is strictly liable for these injuries.

We urge you to evaluate this claim seriously and respond with a reasonable settlement offer. If this matter cannot be resolved, we are prepared to file suit in the Superior Court of New Jersey and pursue this matter through trial.

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: _________________________________
[Attorney Name]
New Jersey Attorney ID No. [Number]
Attorney for [Client Name]

ENCLOSURES: As noted above

cc: [Client Name]
[Co-Counsel, if any]
File

NEW JERSEY PRODUCTS LIABILITY PRACTICE NOTES

• NJPLA Governs: The New Jersey Products Liability Act is the exclusive remedy for products liability claims against manufacturers and sellers. N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:58C-1.

• Risk-Utility Test: New Jersey uses the risk-utility test for design defect claims, considering factors from O'Brien v. Muskin Corp., 94 N.J. 169 (1983).

• State-of-the-Art Defense: Under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:58C-3(a)(1), compliance with state-of-the-art may be a defense if the danger was not known and could not have been known through scientific or technical research.

• Regulatory Compliance: FDA or other regulatory approval is admissible but not dispositive of the defect question.

• Joint and Several Liability: New Jersey has modified joint and several liability. Defendants 60% or more at fault are jointly and severally liable. N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:15-5.3.

• Affidavit of Merit: Products liability cases may require an affidavit of merit under N.J. Stat. Ann. Section 2A:53A-27.

• Punitive Damages: Require clear and convincing evidence; capped at greater of $350,000 or 5x compensatory damages.

• Venue: File in county where cause of action arose or where any defendant resides. N.J. Ct. R. 4:3-2.