Attorney Daniel J. Larson

Everett Product Liability Lawyer

Ordinary use of a product is not misuse of it.

The maker will say you used it wrongly, and the only thing that reliably answers that is the item itself, so keep it, with its packaging and paperwork, however broken it now looks.

As Seen On:

NBC News
WBZ CBS News Boston logo

Finding the others is an Everett product liability lawyer's job.

Nobody inspects the things they buy. You assume the ladder holds, the charger does not catch fire, the airbag opens, the medicine does what the label says. That assumption is reasonable, and it is the whole basis of a claim when it turns out to be wrong.

The first useful thing to know is that you are not expected to identify what went wrong inside it. Whether it was designed badly, built badly, or sold without a warning it needed is a question for people who take these things apart for a living. What you contribute is the item and an account of how you were using it.

The second is that more than one company may be answerable, and identifying which of them is not your problem. The business that made it, whoever imported it, the distributor and the shop that sold it can each sit somewhere in the chain. That matters because the maker is sometimes overseas, sometimes dissolved, and occasionally both.

Warnings are their own category, and the one people dismiss too quickly. Something can be perfectly well made and still reach you without the one thing you needed to be told: that it overheats when covered, that it is not meant for that surface, that using two of them together causes a problem. A missing warning counts on its own.

The third is that you are probably not the first. Something that failed on you has usually failed on somebody else, and that history sits in complaint records, in reports to regulators, in earlier claims, and sometimes in a recall the manufacturer would rather not discuss. Finding it turns one person’s account into a pattern.

The product should reach Daniel J. Larson before it reaches anybody else, because once the other side has collected it for testing, the terms of that testing matter enormously. Photographs of it as it stands, the purchase record, and whatever instructions came with it make up the rest of the first week.

What our clients say

Jeffrey K.
★★★★★
Attorney Larson or Dan as I refer to him now is a phenomenal lawyer who has turned into a friend. He is knowledgeable, smart, extremely thorough and aggressive. He knows the law and delivers fantastic results in a timely fashion. I consider him a great partner and someone I always want to have in my court/corner when I need legal guidance, and support.
Samantha N.
★★★★★
I can’t say enough wonderful things about Dan and his personal injury firm. I’ve seen firsthand how dedicated, knowledgeable, and compassionate he is. Dan is the type of car accident attorney who truly goes above and beyond—he communicates clearly, fights hard for his clients, and genuinely cares about getting them the best possible results.
Jamal B.
★★★★★
Dan and the whole team at Larson Law were super helpful and informative, they were able to walk me through the whole process of my case and they did everything to make sure that I received proper compensation for the incident that happened to me. And I am glad to say that I am very satisfied with the services provided to me by Larson Law. Great team!
Megan A.
★★★★★
Dan was amazing to work with after my car accident. He kept me updated the whole time, explained everything clearly, and always responded quickly. Great communication and a great outcome—highly recommend!
Johnny M.
★★★★★
Dan helped me with a car accident and it was so easy and he is very communicative and reallly helps you out with all he can! Thanks again Dan!
Sina A.
★★★★★
Dan is the Man. He helped me recover from my car accident and the communication and whole process was smooth sailing. Thank you Dan. God speed.
Lee L.
★★★★★
Attorney Larson of Larson Law Did a great job with my case.. I was in a auto accident in 2024 Attorney Larson took my personal injury case and in 2025 I received a maximum payout. Anytime I had a question or concern he was always available.
Cambridge assault and battery lawyer Lowell bicycle accident lawyer Methuen personal injury lawyer Jamaica Plain personal injury lawyer South Boston personal injury lawyer Charlestown personal injury lawyer Brighton personal injury lawyer Milton personal injury lawyer Watertown personal injury lawyer Lawrence personal injury lawyer Plymouth personal injury lawyer distracted driving accident lawyer Massachusetts Massachusetts workplace accident lawyer Massachusetts explosion accident lawyer Massachusetts child injury lawyer Massachusetts bicycle accident lawyer Barnstable personal injury lawyer Chelsea personal injury lawyer Attleboro personal injury lawyer Haverhill personal injury lawyer Peabody personal injury lawyer Taunton personal injury lawyer Fall River personal injury lawyer Massachusetts hit and run accident lawyer drunk driving accident victim lawyer Massachusetts Massachusetts assault and battery civil lawsuit lawyer Framingham personal injury lawyer Brookline personal injury lawyer Weymouth personal injury lawyer Waltham personal injury lawyer Springfield personal injury lawyer Somerville personal injury lawyer Newton personal injury lawyer Massachusetts burn injury lawyer Massachusetts MBTA and bus accident lawyer Massachusetts burn injury lawyer Medford personal injury lawyer Medford personal injury lawyer Medford personal injury lawyer Malden personal injury lawyer Lynn personal injury lawyer Everett personal injury lawyer Massachusetts dog bite lawyer Massachusetts pedestrian accident lawyer Massachusetts spinal cord injury lawyer Massachusetts nursing home abuse lawyer Massachusetts product liability lawyer Massachusetts medical malpractice lawyer Massachusetts construction accident lawyer Massachusetts brain injury lawyer Massachusetts motorcycle accident lawyer Massachusetts personal injury lawyer Worcester Uber accident lawyer Worcester bicycle accident lawyer Worcester bus accident lawyer Quincy bus accident lawyer Quincy assault and battery lawyer Boston assault and battery lawyer Boston bicycle accident lawyer Boston bus accident lawyer Boston cruise ship injury lawyer Boston personal injury attorney Boston product liability lawyer | Taunton slip and fall lawyer Barnstable product liability lawyer Brighton product liability lawyer Pain and suffering settlement Brookline product liability lawyer Chelsea Product Liability Lawyer Fall River product liability lawyer at Larson Law Boston. Lowell personal injury lawyer at Larson Law Boston. Boston nursing home negligence lawyer

This gets decided by experts, not arguments.

You did not have to buy it.

A common reason people never ask is that the thing was not theirs. It was a friend’s ladder, a rented machine, a tool at work, a car somebody else owned, a toy bought for a child by a grandparent. None of that stands in the way. Whoever was reasonably expected to use it, be near it, or be affected by it can bring a claim, and no purchase receipt is required to do so.

What the manufacturer will argue

The defenses are predictable enough to plan for. You used it wrongly. You altered it. It was old and worn out. The danger was plain to see. Something else entirely caused the injury. Each of those is answerable, and the answers come from the same two places: the item, and an honest account of how it was being used at the time. That is why the account given in the first week matters, and why an off-hand remark about having modified something years ago can be worth more to the other side than anything else you say.

The obvious-danger argument deserves its own attention because it sounds so reasonable. A blade is sharp and everybody knows it. But the argument only works where the danger was the one you would expect. A saw that cuts is obvious. A saw whose guard retracts on its own is not, and the fact that saws cut does not excuse it.

Why the testing arrangements matter

At some point the item gets examined, and how that is set up is not a formality. Testing is frequently destructive, meaning the thing can only be taken apart once. If that happens on their terms, with their engineer, in their facility, with nobody present for you, the one thing the case rests on has been consumed in conditions you had no say in. Agreeing the arrangements first is ordinary practice and it is skipped surprisingly often.

Anything printed on a box or a warranty card that appears to sign all this away is worth ignoring. A company cannot use small print to remove its responsibility for injuring somebody, and the fact that you clicked to accept something, or kept a card you never read, changes nothing about what the product was.

The deadline runs from the injury rather than from the purchase, which matters more than it sounds. Something bought years ago that fails now starts the clock now. That is worth knowing because people assume an old product is a lost cause, and assume wrongly.

What happens to the product next depends on where it was.

The useful question is not where the injury happened but what happened to the item afterwards, because that varies enormously by setting and it is the thing nobody thinks about at the time.

When it failed at work

A machine that injured somebody is usually running again within days. It gets repaired, adjusted, or quietly taken out of service and replaced, and each of those alters or removes the evidence. The employer has its own reasons for moving quickly and they are not sinister, but they are not your reasons either. There is often an internal incident record, sometimes a maintenance log showing the fault had come up before, and occasionally a modification the employer made that the manufacturer will later point at. Where it happened at work there is normally a workplace claim running alongside the claim against the maker, and the two need handling together rather than separately.

A fire is its own situation. The scene is evidence and it does not last, because a property has to be made safe and then repaired. Insurers investigate fires as a matter of routine to establish where one started, which means a report often exists that nobody has asked for, and the remains of whatever caused it may have been bagged by someone whose interest is not yours. Getting to that early separates a case from a theory.

A borrowed or rented item raises a different problem, which is that somebody else owns it. They may want it back, want it repaired, or simply want it gone. None of that is unreasonable from their side and all of it is a problem from yours, so the conversation about keeping it needs to happen immediately rather than once the hospital is done.

Anything implanted or worn brings a further complication, because the item may still be in use, or may have been removed and kept by a hospital rather than by you. Hospitals have their own retention rules and their own paperwork, and asking for something before it is disposed of is a very different exercise from asking afterwards.

Who else has the same one

The same model is rarely unique to you. A neighbor in the same building bought one, a colleague uses the identical machine, a landlord fitted the same appliance in every unit. None of that is evidence on its own, but it is how anyone finds out whether this has happened before, and it is far easier to trace in the first weeks while people still connect your injury with the thing sitting in their own kitchen.

The practical position, whatever the setting, comes down to three things. Do not let anybody take it away, repair it, or test it without an arrangement in place. Photograph it where it is, before it moves. And get the purchase or supply record, because the name on that document is frequently not the name on the product, and the difference decides who has to answer.

Some injuries keep changing for years.

The difficult part of valuing one of these is that the injury is still moving. Most claims are about something that happened and is now over. Here a good deal of it has not happened yet, and the parts that have are not finished.

Burns are the clearest example and the most underestimated. A graft does not close the file. Scar tissue tightens as it matures, which can pull a joint out of its range months after everyone declared the wound healed, and releasing it means going back in. Skin that has been burned stops regulating temperature properly and stops tolerating sun, which sounds minor until it decides what work somebody can do outdoors and what every summer after looks like.

A lost limb is not a single purchase either. A prosthesis is fitted, then refitted, because the residual limb changes shape for a year or more and keeps changing afterwards. Sockets stop fitting. Components wear out on a schedule. What somebody does with their days decides what device they actually need, and the difference between a basic fitting and one that lets a person work is the difference the claim has to carry.

Something implanted that turns out to be faulty brings a decision nobody wants. Removing it is another operation with its own risks, and occasionally it cannot safely come out at all, which means living with a device that is known to be wrong. That is a distinct harm and it belongs in the claim as one.

Work divides into two questions rather than one. There is the job that has gone, which is straightforward enough to establish, and there is the job that is still technically possible but now costs somebody far more to do than it used to. Retraining into something else is a real expense with a real timeline, and it is frequently cheaper for everyone than pretending the original job is still available.

The household absorbs a great deal of this quietly. Dressing changes twice a day for months, driving to a specialist unit that is not local, a partner who drops to part time to manage appointments. None of it arrives as a bill and all of it is a cost, and it only enters the claim if somebody writes it down as it happens.

Then there is the list nobody thinks to keep. Pressure garments that need replacing, clothing that no longer works over a graft, footwear made to fit, a bathroom that has to be altered, a car that needs changing. Individually they look like small domestic purchases. Totalled across a life they are not small at all.

A child injured by a product carries it forward differently. Devices and adaptations get outgrown rather than worn out, scarring has to be revised around growth, and a course of treatment that suits a seven year old has to be redesigned at twelve and again at sixteen. A settlement reached early is a settlement reached before anyone knows what any of that will involve.

Defective and Unsafe Products

Design and Manufacturing Defects

Failure to Warn

Serious and Permanent Injuries

Everything starts with
not throwing it away.

Keep the product and get care

Get medical treatment right away, and if you safely can, keep the product, its parts, packaging, and any manuals as they are. Do not repair or discard it, and photograph how it happened.

Talk to an Everett product lawyer

Reach out for one free, private conversation. We explain how the warranty and defect rules apply, work out who in the chain is responsible, answer any claim of misuse, and preserve evidence.

We prove the defect and press on

We have the product examined by the right experts, identify every responsible maker and seller, deal with the insurer, and pursue the full cost of a serious injury, at trial if no fair offer comes.

An Everett product liability
lawyer can stop that.

Somebody else usually sets the window here. A retailer offers to take it back and look at it. An employer sends the machine off for repair. An insurer asks you to post it in. Each is a reasonable request, and agreeing without an arrangement in place can end the claim. That arrangement takes one call. If the injury runs wider than this, the firm’s broader work covers it.

By submitting this form, you acknowledge that doing so does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not include confidential information. Contacting us does not obligate you to retain our services.

Our Clients.

These are what people want settled early on.

Do I have to prove the company was negligent to win a product case?

Often not. Massachusetts protects injured consumers through the implied warranty of merchantability, which works much like strict liability. You generally need to show the product was not fit and safe for its ordinary use and that it caused your injury, not that the company was careless.

Yes. Massachusetts has abolished the privity requirement, so you do not have to have bought the product to bring a claim. The law protects anyone the maker or seller could reasonably expect to use or be affected by the product, including family members and bystanders.

Generally three. A manufacturing defect means the item left the factory flawed; a design defect means it is dangerous even when made correctly, often because a safer design was possible; and a failure to warn means it lacked adequate warnings about a hidden danger.

Potentially everyone in the chain of sale, the manufacturer, a component maker, the distributor, and the retailer, and more than one may be liable. Identifying every responsible party early matters, especially when the manufacturer is out of state or hard to reach.

Because the product itself is usually the most important evidence. Its condition, components, packaging, and manuals are what experts examine to prove the defect, and losing, repairing, or discarding it can seriously weaken or even bar a claim. Keep it unaltered and let a lawyer arrange inspection.

Get medical care, and if you safely can, preserve the product exactly as it is with its parts, packaging, receipts, and manuals. Do not repair or discard anything, photograph how the injury happened, note witnesses, and speak with a lawyer before dealing with the insurer.

Yes. A manufacturer does not escape responsibility simply by being located in another state or country. Massachusetts law lets an injured person pursue a company that placed its product into the stream of commerce here, and look to the distributors and retailers who sold it.

Generally three years from the date the injury and damage occur, for both warranty and negligence claims. Because the product and other evidence are most at risk early, and these cases take time to develop, it is best to involve a lawyer promptly rather than wait.

Often yes. Manufacturers routinely claim misuse, but the law asks whether the use was reasonably foreseeable, and many uses a company calls misuse are exactly what it should have anticipated and guarded against. We answer with the facts, the product, and expert analysis.

We handle the full range, including burns and fires from batteries and appliances, injuries from defective tools and machinery, harm from unsafe vehicle parts, dangerous consumer and children’s products, and defective medical devices. In every case we work to prove the defect and hold every responsible company accountable.

There is no fixed figure. Value depends on the severity and permanence of your injuries, your medical costs, lost income and earning capacity, and the pain you endure. We document each loss, including future care, and use experts where needed, so the claim reflects the true cost.

Nothing upfront. We work on a contingency fee, so there is no hourly billing and no fee unless we recover for you. The first review of your product injury is free, so there is no financial risk in finding out where you stand.

Results Disclaimer: Past case results, settlements, and verdicts mentioned on this website do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome in any future case. Every case is unique and depends on its own facts and legal issues.