Dec. 6 US: Product Liability Advisory November 2012: Indirect Warnings May Be Sufficient as a Matter of Law

Posted Date: 
Thursday, December 6, 2012

This advisory is brought to you by Sedgwick LLP concerning a language dispute on product labels.

In a unanimous decision released on June 21, 2012 the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals sanctioned the ability of trial courts to determine the adequacy of a warning label as a matter of law.  See Farias v. Mr. Heater, Inc., 684 F.3d 1231, 1236 (11th Cir. 2012). The court also held that despite the fact that a manufacturer sells products to Spanish-speaking customers in South Florida, that the manufacturer was not required to provide Spanish-language warning labels. Id. This case is important because it will likely provide leverage for future manufacturers seeking summary judgment on the issue of whether a particular warning label was sufficient.

While the full impact of the 11th Circuit decision is unknown at this time, the case’s dicta seems like a clear warning—no pun intended—that if a company is marketing to and targeting a Hispanic population, that it  could subject itself to additional liability by failing to include Spanish-language warnings. At the same time, the decision provides valuable leverage for companies who are fighting “failure to warn” cases because the 11th Circuit made clear that the adequacy of a warning can be decided as a matter of law even if the warning only indirectly prohibited the damage-causing activity.

For more of the facts about the case please refer to the link above.


Nexreg provided prompt and professional service when we needed rapid turn-around time on an MSDS. Nexreg was very easy to deal with and provided guidance throughout the process and always responded immediately to any questions we had.
Jill Hamilton, Verla International LTD.