Tennessee § 29-28-104 - Compliance with government standards — Rebuttable presumption.

§ 29-28-104. Compliance with government standards — Rebuttable presumption.

Compliance by a manufacturer or seller with any federal or state statute or administrative regulation existing at the time a product was manufactured and prescribing standards for design, inspection, testing, manufacture, labeling, warning or instructions for use of a product, shall raise a rebuttable presumption that the product is not in an unreasonably dangerous condition in regard to matters covered by these standards. A manufacturer or seller, other than a manufacturer of a drug or device, shall not be liable for exemplary or punitive damages if: The product alleged to have caused the harm was designed, manufactured, packaged, labeled, sold, or represented in relevant and material respects in accordance with the terms of approval, license or similar determination of a government agency; or The product was in compliance with a statute of the state or the United States, or a standard, rule, regulation, order, or other action of a government agency pursuant to statutory authority, when such statute or agency action is relevant to the event or risk allegedly causing the harm and the product was in compliance at the time the product left the control of the manufacturer or seller. Subsection (b) shall not apply if the claimant establishes that the manufacturer or seller: At any time before the event that allegedly caused the harm, sold the product after the effective date of an order of a government agency that ordered the removal of the product from the market or withdrew the agency's approval of the product; or In violation of applicable regulations, withheld or misrepresented to the government agency information material to the approval and such information is relevant to the harm which the claimant allegedly suffered. The award of punitive or exemplary damages against a manufacturer of a drug or device shall be governed by § 29-39-104. Acts 1978, ch. 703, § 4; T.C.A., § 23-3704; Acts 2011, ch. 510, § 11. Compiler's Notes. Acts 2011, ch. 510, § 1, provided that the act shall be known and cited as the “Tennessee Civil Justice Act of 2011.” Acts 2011, ch. 510, § 24, provided that the act, which added subsections (b)-(d), shall apply to all liability actions for injuries, deaths and losses covered by this act which accrue on or after October 1, 2011. Law Reviews. Mass Tort Litigation in Tennessee (Paul Campbell, III and Hugh J. Moore, Jr.), 53 Tenn. L. Rev. 221 (1986). Products Liability and Economic Activity: An Empirical Analysis of Tort Reform's Impact on Businesses, Employment, and Production (Joanna M. Shepherd), 66 Vand. L. Rev. 257 (2013). The Restatement (Third) of Products Liability: Is it a Reasonable Alternative Design to Tennessee's Products Liability Statute? (Robert S. Stevens), 39 U. Mem. L. Rev. 463 (2009). The Role of Federal Safety Regulations in Products Liability Actions (Teresa Moran Schwartz), 41 Vand. L. Rev. 6 (1988). The Tennessee Products Liability Act, 9 Mem. St. U.L. Rev. 105. Cited: Baker v. Lederle Laboratories, 696 S.W.2d 890, 1985 Tenn. App. LEXIS 2971 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1985); Myers v. Hayes International Corp., 701 F. Supp. 618, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13348 (M.D. Tenn. 1988); Lake v. Memphis Landsmen, LLC, — S.W.3d —, 2010 Tenn. App. LEXIS 200 (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 15, 2010); Alexander v. Antonio Zamperla, S.P.A., — S.W.3d —, 2010 Tenn. App. LEXIS 549 (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2010).