Under Nevada defective product law, a product can generally be defective in three ways: in its design, in its manufacture, or in its warnings. Nevada applies strict liability to these claims, so an injured person focuses on the product and whether a defect caused the injury, rather than on how careful the company was.
This guide explains each type of defect, what Nevada courts look for, and how these claims can be proven.
Key Takeaways
- The three main types of defect are design, manufacturing, and failure to warn.
- Nevada uses the consumer-expectation test for strict liability design defect claims.
- A plaintiff does not have to prove a safer alternative design in Nevada.
- An unexpected, dangerous malfunction may be enough to establish a prima facie case of defect.
- A plaintiff must still prove that the defect existed when the product left the defendant’s hands and that it caused the injury.
What Are the Three Types of Product Defects?
| Type | What it means | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Design defect | The whole product line has an unsafe design | A vehicle roof that fails to perform as expected |
| Manufacturing defect | One unit or batch differs from the intended design | A contaminated food or beverage |
| Failure to warn | Instructions or warnings do not adequately address a risk | Missing or unclear safety information |
What Is a Design Defect in Nevada?
In Ford Motor Co. v. Trejo, a 2017 decision, the Nevada Supreme Court kept the consumer-expectation test for strict liability design defect claims. A product is defective if it fails to perform as reasonably expected in light of its nature and intended function, and is more dangerous than would be contemplated by the ordinary user with community knowledge of its characteristics.
The court declined to adopt the risk-utility test and held that proof of a safer alternative design is not required. Read more about Nevada defective product claims.
What Is a Manufacturing Defect?
A manufacturing defect is an error in how a specific item was made. The design may be fine, but the item that reached the consumer was not. In Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Dolinski, a 1966 decision involving a bottled beverage, the Nevada Supreme Court recognized strict liability even without negligence or a contract between the parties.
Proving the exact flaw can be hard. In Stackiewicz v. Nissan Motor Corp., a 1984 decision, the court said proof of an unexpected, dangerous malfunction may suffice to establish a prima facie case of a product defect.
What Is a Failure to Warn?
A product can be defective because of what the company did not say. In Rivera v. Philip Morris, Inc., a 2009 decision, the court said a product may be found unreasonably dangerous and defective if the manufacturer failed to provide an adequate warning.
The same decision held that Nevada does not recognize a heeding presumption, so a plaintiff must prove the inadequate warning caused the injury. The evidence may need to show that a better warning would have changed what happened.
What Must Be Proven in Any Defect Claim?
- A defect. The product was defective in design, manufacture, or warnings.
- Timing. The defect existed when the product left the defendant’s hands.
- Causation. The defect caused the injury.
Strict liability does not remove these requirements. Shoshone states that the plaintiff must still establish that the injury was caused by a defect that existed when the product left the defendant’s hands.
What Other Legal Theories Can Apply?
- Strict liability. The focus is on the product.
- Negligence. The focus is on whether a company failed to use reasonable care. See the elements of negligence.
- Breach of warranty. The focus is on promises about the product, including the implied warranties in NRS Chapter 104.
What Defenses Can a Company Raise?
In Young’s Machine Co. v. Long, a 1984 decision, the Nevada Supreme Court described assumption of the risk and misuse of the product as the defenses Nevada had recognized in strict products liability. A company may also argue that there was no defect, or that something else caused the injury.
How Long Do You Have to File?
Nevada generally allows 2 years to sue for personal injury under NRS 11.190(4)(e), and 3 years for injury to personal property under NRS 11.190(3)(c). Exceptions can apply, and a lawyer can explain which deadline fits your situation.
Talk With a Nevada Defective Product Lawyer
Vaksman Khalfin, PC handles Nevada defective product claims and has an office in Las Vegas. A lawyer can review your situation and explain the options that may be available. Contact us or visit our Nevada defective products page to learn more.
General information, not legal advice. This page is provided for general informational purposes only and is not medical advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this page or contacting the firm. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Reviewed by Robert B. Vaksman, Partner, Vaksman Khalfin, PC (admitted in Nevada). Last reviewed: 11/05/2026
Frequently Asked Questions
A product can be defective in its design, manufacture, or warnings. Under Ford Motor Co. v. Trejo, a design is defective if the product fails to perform as reasonably expected and is more dangerous than an ordinary user would contemplate.
Yes. Nevada recognizes strict liability for defective products. A plaintiff does not have to prove negligence, but must still prove a defect, that it existed when the product left the defendant's hands, and that it caused the injury.
Not always. Under Stackiewicz v. Nissan Motor Corp., proof of an unexpected, dangerous malfunction may suffice to establish a prima facie case of defect. The defendant can still contest it.
Possibly. A warning may be inadequate, and a warning does not necessarily address a dangerous design. Whether a warning is enough depends on the product and the facts.
