If you suffer an injury due to a product not working correctly, then you have the option of filing a product liability case in Ohio. However, proving your case may rely on showing the existence of a reasonable alternative design, which according to the American Bar Association, is a different design that could have been used to create the product and would have prevented your injuries. If you take this route, it is important to understand the limits of the definition of a reasonable alternative design.

Ideally, you want to show that a different design would provide the same benefits and uses as the defective design but without subjecting users to injury risks. However, the defense will try to show the distinct differences between your proposed design and the defective design to prove that they are not interchangeable thereby eliminating your suggestion as a reasonable alternative design.

The important thing to keep in mind is that you cannot just suggest a design that would produce the same results. It also need to provide a similar experience over all. For example, if the product in question provides you with the end result through a specific method of delivery, then you probably will not succeed in suggesting an alternative that provides you with the end result through another method of delivery. The pathway to the end result should be very similar if you want to propose an alternative design. Fundamental differences like this are a good way to lose your case based on a reasonable alternative design. This information is for education and is not legal advice.