Products liability in Texas — the safer alternative design, and why you usually cannot sue the store

Texas products liability is common-law strict liability with a statute built over it. Chapter 82 supplies three things that decide these cases: a statutory element for design defect, a shield for sellers who did not make the product, and an indemnity running from the manufacturer to the seller.

Two deadlines apply at once. Two years from the injury, and 15 years from the date the product was sold, whichever expires first.

What the claim is

A product injured you because it was designed dangerously, built wrong, or sold without adequate warnings.

Where the right comes from

Common-law strict liability, adopted from § 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, together with chapter 82 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. The controlling design defect case is Timpte Industries, Inc. v. Gish, 286 S.W.3d 306 (Tex. 2009).

What a plaintiff has to prove — PJC 71.3

Design defect — CPRC § 82.005

1. A safer alternative design existed.
2. The product was defectively designed so as to render it unreasonably dangerous.
3. The defect was a producing cause of the injury, death or property damage.

The statute defines a safer alternative design as one that, in reasonable probability, would have prevented or significantly reduced the risk without substantially impairing the product's utility and that was economically and technologically feasible at the time the product left the defendant's control.

The plaintiff has to prove the alternative existed. It is not enough to show the product was dangerous.

Manufacturing defect

The product deviated from its specifications or planned output in a way that made it unreasonably dangerous, the deviation existed when it left the manufacturer's control, and it was a producing cause of the injury. This is the easiest of the three to prove conceptually and the hardest evidentially, because it usually requires the product itself.

Marketing defect — failure to warn

A risk of harm was inherent in the product or arose from its intended use, the manufacturer knew or should have known of it, the warnings or instructions given were inadequate, and that inadequacy was a producing cause.

The learned intermediary doctrine applies to prescription drugs and medical devices: the manufacturer's duty runs to the prescribing physician, not to the patient.

How long you have to file

Two years from the injury, under CPRC § 16.003(a).

Fifteen years from the date of sale, under CPRC § 16.012 — a statute of repose, which bars the claim whether or not it has accrued. Three exceptions matter:

• A written warranty of a longer useful safe life. If the manufacturer expressly warranted the product would last longer than 15 years, the repose period matches the warranty.
• Latent disease. The repose does not apply where the claimant was exposed within 15 years of the first sale, the exposure caused the disease, and the symptoms did not manifest in time to bring a claim.
• Sales only. The section applies to the sale of a product, not to a lease.

What has to happen before you file

Nothing.

What the claim pays

Personal injury damages, with medical expenses limited to amounts paid or incurred under CPRC § 41.0105.

Property damage and, in some circumstances, economic loss — subject to the economic loss rule where the only harm is to the product itself.

Exemplary damages for gross negligence on clear and convincing proof, capped by CPRC § 41.008.

No attorney's fees.

Who can be sued — the innocent seller rule

CPRC § 82.003 provides that a seller who did not manufacture the product is not liable unless the claimant proves one of several exceptions, including that the seller:

• participated in the design;
• altered or modified the product, and the harm resulted from that;
• installed the product onto another product, and the harm resulted from the installation;
• exercised substantial control over a warning or instruction that accompanied it;
• made an independent express factual representation that was incorrect and caused the harm;
• "actually knew of a defect" when it supplied the product; or
• the manufacturer is insolvent or not subject to the court's jurisdiction.

That last exception is why the retailer stays in the case where the manufacturer is overseas and cannot be served.

CPRC § 82.002 requires a manufacturer to indemnify a seller for losses arising out of a products liability action, except for the seller's own negligence or misrepresentation.

Common defenses

• No safer alternative design. The dispositive defense in design cases after Timpte.
• The innocent seller shield.
• Product misuse or unforeseeable alteration.
• The danger was open and obvious, or inherent in a product whose risks are commonly known.
• The 15-year repose.
• Compliance with government standards. CPRC § 82.008 creates a rebuttable presumption of non-liability where the product complied with mandatory federal safety standards governing the risk that caused the harm.
• Learned intermediary, in pharmaceutical cases.
• Proportionate responsibility under CPRC § 33.001.

What people get wrong

Suing the store rarely works. Texas shields non-manufacturing sellers, and the plaintiff has to fit an exception or show the manufacturer cannot be reached.

"It was dangerous" is not a design defect case. You have to prove a specific alternative design that was feasible when the product was made and would have prevented the harm without ruining the product.

The 15-year clock runs from the sale, not from the injury. A machine bought in 2008 that injures someone in 2026 is generally outside the claim regardless of the two-year period.

Compliance with federal standards is not a complete defense, but it does shift the burden through a rebuttable presumption.

Where it came from

Texas adopted strict products liability in 1967, following § 402A, and for two decades it was purely judge-made law.

The 1993 session added chapter 82 with the design defect elements and the manufacturer's duty to indemnify sellers. The 15-year repose came in 1993 as well, in § 16.012. The 2003 tort reform session added the innocent seller shield in § 82.003 and the government-standards presumption in § 82.008.

Timpte Industries v. Gish in 2009 made the safer alternative design element the practical centre of a Texas design case, and summary judgment on that element is now the standard defence move.

Common questions

How long do I have to sue over a defective product in Texas?

Two years from the injury, and no more than 15 years from the date the product was sold.

Can I sue the store where I bought it?

Usually not. A seller that did not manufacture the product is shielded unless an exception applies — most often that the manufacturer is insolvent or beyond the court's jurisdiction.

What is a safer alternative design?

A design that was economically and technologically feasible when the product was made, and that would have prevented or significantly reduced the risk without substantially impairing the product's utility.

Can I recover attorney's fees?

No.

Does it matter that the product met federal safety standards?

Yes. Compliance with a mandatory federal standard governing the risk creates a rebuttable presumption that the manufacturer is not liable.

What if the product was 20 years old?

The 15-year statute of repose will usually bar the claim, unless the manufacturer warranted a longer useful safe life or the case involves a latent disease.

Where these rules live

• CPRC § 16.003 — Two-year limitations period
• CPRC § 16.012 — Products liability, 15-year repose
• CPRC § 82.002 — Manufacturer's duty to indemnify
• CPRC § 82.003 — Liability of nonmanufacturing sellers
• CPRC § 82.005 — Design defects
• CPRC § 82.008 — Compliance with government standards
• CPRC § 41.0105 — Evidence relating to amount of economic damages