Under the Restatement Third, a design is defective when the foreseeable risks could have been reduced by a reasonable alternative design and the omission of that design renders the product not reasonably safe.
The alternative must have been feasible at the time of sale, not merely conceivable in hindsight.
Alternative Names:
RAD, Alternative Design
Why it Matters?
This requirement is the central battleground in design defect litigation. Plaintiffs frequently propose alternatives that were unavailable when the product was made, that were never tested, or that would have introduced offsetting risks. A defense expert who builds and tests the proposed alternative and demonstrates its tradeoffs is far more persuasive than one who argues abstractly that the existing design was adequate.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
Must the alternative design have existed at the time of sale?
How is a proposed alternative design tested?
