Fill and Sign the Complaint Mississippi 497314658 Form

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF VS. NO.             DEFENDANT COMPLAINT That the Defendant,       , hereinafter referred to as       , is a corporation duly licensed and qualified to do business in the State of       and is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Honorable Court. That       has its domestic and principle place of business in       ,       , its registered agent for service of process is the       . 1. Defendant,       , is the manufacturer, distributor, and marketer of a product known as       , which is       . It is sold as a product to work as       . 2. The       had a duty to manufacture a product which would be safe for its intended and foreseeable uses and users, including the use to which it was put by       . The Defendant breached its duty to consumers and users of in the following manner: Defendant,       , was negligent in the design, development, manufacture, and testing of       . 3. Defendant,       , was negligent in failing to properly test       to determine the dangerous potential when used when it knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that       would be used. 4. Defendant,       , negligently failed to adequately warn and instruct the users of       , such as and including       , of the high degree of risk attendant to the using       in the manner in which       used it, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that the users of       would be ignorant of the said defective, dangerous and hazardous use of       when using it. 5. The Defendant,       , failed to exercise reasonable care in the manufacture of       , which, unless carefully made, the Defendant recognized or by the exercise of reasonable care should have recognized as involving an unreasonable risk of causing physical harm to those upon whom it would be used for a purpose such as the instant case for which the manufacturer would expect it to be used, and to those whom the manufacturer would expect to endangered by its probable use.       is, therefore, liable to this Plaintiff for physical harm caused by       in the manner and for a purpose for which it was designed, manufactured, distributed, sold and otherwise supplied by your Defendant. Whereupon, the Plaintiff respectfully relies upon the Restatement, Second, Torts 395. 6. The Defendant,       , further breached its duties to your Plaintiff by supplying directly and/or through a third person to be used by such foreseeable persons such as your Plaintiff when       , or had reason to know, that the       was dangerous or was likely to be dangerous for the use for which it was supplied; and This Defendant failed to exercise reasonable care to inform       of the dangerous condition, or of the facts under which       is likely to be dangerous. 7. Therefore, your Plaintiff,       , respectfully relies upon the Doctrine and Theory of Negligence as contained in       . 8. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant,       , manufactured the       in question and put       into the stream of commerce in a defective condition when it was unreasonably dangerous to the ultimate user, your Plaintiff,       . 9. Defendant,       , is strictly liable in tort for the Plaintiff's injuries and damages and the Plaintiff respectfully relies upon the Doctrine as set forth in Restatement, Second, Torts 402(a). 10. The Defendant,       , impliedly warranted that       was fit to be used for the purpose for which it was designed, manufactured, and sold, that it was a safe, suitable product to be used by persons such as       in the manner in which it was used, and that       was fit and suitable for the uses such as the use in fact made of in the instant case. 11. In using       , Plaintiff,       , relied upon the skill and judgment of the Defendant,       , and also relied upon the implied warranty of fitness for the purpose for which your Plaintiff was using       . 12.       was not fit for use for its intended purposes for which it was used by your Plaintiff, and as a result of the breach of warranty of fitness by       , your Plaintiff sustained the injuries and damages set forth below. 13. Because of the negligence of the design and manufacture of a       on which Plaintiff was injured and the failure of       to warn Plaintiff of the certain dangers concerning the operation of the       which were known to Defendants but were unknown to Plaintiff, the Defendants have omitted a tort in whole or in part within the jurisdiction and venue of this Court. 14. The       which caused Plaintiff's injuries was manufactured by       . 15. At all times herein material, Defendants negligently and carelessly did certain acts and failed to do other things, including but not limited to inventing, developing, designing, researching, guarding, manufacturing, building, inspecting, investigating, testing, labeling, instructing, and negligently and carelessly failed to provide adequate and fair warning of the characteristics, angers and hazards associated with the operation of the       in question to users of the       , and including but not limited to Plaintiff, and willfully failed to recall or otherwise cure one or more of the defects in the product involved thereby directly and proximately causing the hereinafter described injury. 16. On or about       , Plaintiff was engaged in operation of       when, as a direct and proximate result of the carelessness and negligence of the Defendants, an injury occurred. 17. At all times herein mentioned, the Plaintiff was using Defendants'       or working thereon in a prudent manner. 18. The abovementioned       was unsafe for its use by reason of the fact that it was defective. For example, and not in limiting of the foregoing, the       was defective in its design, guarding, development, manufacture, and because this       neither had nor was accompanied by permanent, accurate and adequate and fair warning of the characteristics, danger and hazard to the user, prospective user and members of the general public, including but not limited to Plaintiff, and because Defendants failed to recall or otherwise cure one or more defects in the       involved thereby directly and proximately causing the described injuries and occurrence. 19. Defendants, and each of them, knew or reasonably should have known that the above mentioned product would be purchased and used without all necessary testing or inspection for defects by the Plaintiff and persons similarly situated. 20. The above-mentioned product was unsafe for its use by reason of the fact that it was defective. For example, and not in limitation of the foregoing, the product was defective in its inventing, developing, designing, researching, guarding, purchasing, compounding, selecting, manufacturing, building, owning, inspecting, investigating, testing, labeling, representing, caring for, specifying, maintaining, packaging, supplying, shipping, furnishing, and selling, and because the product neither had nor was accompanied by permanent, accurate, adequate, and fair warning of the characteristics, dangers and hazards of the product to purchasers and users, prospective purchasers and users, and members of the general public, including but not limited to Plaintiff, and because Defendants failed to recall or otherwise cure one or more defects in the product involved, thereby directly and proximately causing the described incident and occurrence. 21. Plaintiff was not aware of those defects at any time before the incident and occurrence mentioned in this complaint, or else Plaintiff was unable, as a practical matter, to cure that defective condition. 22. Plaintiff used the product in a foreseeable manner. 23. That       is permanently and totally disabled by reason of the recklessness, carelessness, and medical negligence of the Defendants. As a proximate result of the negligence of Defendants, Plaintiff,       suffered the following injuries and damages: (1) Medical, hospital, doctor and drug bills, both in the past and reasonably anticipated in the future; (2) The loss of wages to date, and Plaintiff,       , reasonably anticipates losing wages and income in the future; (3) Loss of wage earning capacity; (4) Permanent disability; (5) Severe pain and suffering in the past and Plaintiff reasonably anticipates to experience severe pain and suffering in the future; (6) Severe painful and disabling injuries to       body as a whole; (7) Mental anguish and shock to       nervous system. 24. That the Plaintiff,       , is the       of       , Plaintiff in this cause, and that as a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants as set out above and injuries sustained by Plaintiff 's       as set out above, Plaintiff has sustained great and irreparable loss in that       will be deprived for the remainder of life of the society, companionship, consortium, comfort, solace and service of       for all which loss and deprivation, injury and damage, Plaintiff is entitled to damages in this cause. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs bring this action against the Defendants, jointly and severally, and demand judgment against       in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this court and in excess of       . Respectfully submitted this the       day of       , 20       . _______________________________________       Attorney for       Of Counsel:                         Telephone:       MSB #       Attorney for