Photo of George A. Pisano

George Pisano has 30 years of experience handling a wide range of personal injury and casualty-related matters. His practice focuses primarily on the defense of product liability claims with particular emphasis on representing worldwide manufacturers of heavy machinery. He is well versed in fire litigation, having handled numerous such cases for electronics and appliance manufacturers. In his role as National Counsel for the world’s largest machine tool manufacturer, George has substantial experience in cases involving industrial equipment and metalworking machinery.

In most product liability lawsuits, the plaintiff will sue under theories of negligence and strict liability. In such cases, the plaintiff may allege that the product’s manufacturer was negligent or that the product was “defective” for failure to include available safety devices that would have prevented the accident. Because negligence claims focus on whether the manufacturer acted “reasonably” when it designed the product at issue in the case, the manufacturer is allowed to present evidence comparing the product with those of competitors. For example, the manufacturer can introduce evidence showing that the industry custom & practice was not to include such safety devices. To preclude such evidence of industry custom & practice, plaintiffs typically drop negligence claims on the eve of trial and, instead, only try the case on a theory of strict liability – design defect (under either the “consumer expectations test” or “risk/benefit test”).
Continue Reading California Appeals Court Rules Industry Custom & Practice May Be Admissible in Strict Products Liability Cases