United States: Product Liability & Safety

Together, these laws change the rules for cannabis testing, certificates of analysis, packaging, advertising, edible labels, and multi-serving beverages. Some provisions take effect on January 1, 2027. Others arrive in July 2027 or January 2028. But none should be ignored until the last minute.

The California Supreme Court rejected a novel negligence theory that would have let plaintiffs sue manufacturers over nondefective products for not developing a “better” alternative sooner.

The Supreme Court of Alabama, applying Alabama law, has held that a pharmacy technician’s act of compounding medication constitutes a “professional service” under a professional services exclusion in a commercial general liability policy. OMS Pharmacy, Inc. v. Nationwide Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 2026 WL 3031566 (Ala. Oct. 9, 2026).

A federal judge has issued a critical Initial Management Order in the Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant multidistrict litigation, establishing the legal framework for thousands of consolidated claims. The Order appoints leadership teams and sets near-term deadlines as patients who experienced complications from the allegedly defective hydrogel device seek justice through the court system.

A federal court in Ohio has ruled that an occupational disease exclusion in a commercial general liability policy bars coverage for PFAS-related personal injury claims brought by firefighters against a manufacturer of firefighting equipment. This landmark decision could significantly impact how insurers respond to PFAS product liability claims and may extend beyond occupational disease exclusions to other policy provisions using similarly broad language.

Alcohol beverage companies face a complex regulatory environment as states enact new legislation, federal agencies propose changes to ingredient and formulation requirements, and hemp-derived THC products generate ongoing legal scrutiny. Recent developments include FDA proposals affecting GRAS notifications and color additives, state-level actions on distribution and sales restrictions, and evolving trademark disputes that may impact product development and compliance strategies.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently addressed whether manufacturers can be held liable under consumer protection laws for failing to disclose potential product defects that manifest after purchase. In Halpern v. Ricoh, U.S.A., Inc., the Court examined whether a vendor's silence about a latent defect constitutes "deceptive conduct" under Pennsylvania's catch-all consumer protection provision, establishing important boundaries for when disclosure duties arise in product liability cases.

A federal court has denied a plaintiff's attempt to amend his ultra-processed food lawsuit, reinforcing that epidemiological correlations cannot substitute for specific causation in product liability cases. The ruling highlights the fundamental challenge facing personal injury plaintiffs who seek to attribute chronic diseases to consumption of multiple products from different manufacturers over extended periods.

A federal court has permanently blocked California's Attorney General from enforcing Proposition 65 cancer warnings for diethanolamine (DEA) in cosmetics and personal care products, marking the fourth successful First Amendment challenge to the state's warning requirements in recent years. The stipulated judgment follows similar victories involving glyphosate, acrylamide, and titanium dioxide, establishing a consistent legal framework for challenging Proposition 65 warnings based on disputed scientific evid