The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XLV
TORTS

Chapter 768
NEGLIGENCE

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 768.1256

768.1256 Government rules defense.—

(1) In a product liability action brought against a manufacturer or seller for harm allegedly caused by a product, there is a rebuttable presumption that the product is not defective or unreasonably dangerous and the manufacturer or seller is not liable if, at the time the specific unit of the product was sold or delivered to the initial purchaser or user, the aspect of the product that allegedly caused the harm:

(a) Complied with federal or state codes, statutes, rules, regulations, or standards relevant to the event causing the death or injury;

(b) The codes, statutes, rules, regulations, or standards are designed to prevent the type of harm that allegedly occurred; and

(c) Compliance with the codes, statutes, rules, regulations, or standards is required as a condition for selling or distributing the product.

(2) In a product liability action as described in subsection (1), there is a rebuttable presumption that the product is defective or unreasonably dangerous and the manufacturer or seller is liable if the manufacturer or seller did not comply with the federal or state codes, statutes, rules, regulations, or standards which:

(a) Were relevant to the event causing the death or injury;

(b) Are designed to prevent the type of harm that allegedly occurred; and

(3) This section does not apply to an action brought for harm allegedly caused by a drug that is ordered off the market or seized by the Federal Food and Drug Administration.

History.—s. 15, ch. 99-225.

F.S. 768.1256 on Google Scholar

F.S. 768.1256 on Casetext

Amendments to 768.1256

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 768.1256

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 768.1256.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

A. BENNETT, TAB, EEB, v. FOREST LABORATORIES,, 99 F. Supp. 3d 1360 (M.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . Whether the claims are barred by Florida Statute § 768.1256? . . . Forest Laboratories argues all claims are barred pursuant to Florida Statute § 768.1256 because it complied . . . Stat. § 768.1256(2). Bennett argues FDA approval is not tantamount to compliance. . . . Stat. § 768.1256. . . .

TILLMAN, v. C. R. BARD, INC., 96 F. Supp. 3d 1307 (M.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . This presumption, known as the Government Rules Defense, is set forth in section 768.1256(1) of the Florida . . . Stat. § 768.1256(1). . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CIVIL CASES- REPORT NO. PRODUCTS LIABILITY, 160 So. 3d 869 (Fla. 2015)

. . . F.S. 768.1256 provides for a rebutta-ble presumption in the event of compliance or noncompliance with . . . NOTE ON USE FOR 403.18c Florida — Statutes—seetieaFN. 768.1256 provides for a rebuttable presumption . . .

In FOSAMAX PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. v., 509 F. App'x 69 (2d Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 768.1256(1). Secrest argues that because she alone offered a regulatory expert at trial, Dr. . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CIVIL CASES- REPORT NO. PRODUCTS LIABILITY, 91 So. 3d 785 (Fla. 2012)

. . . NOTE ON USE FOR 403.18c Florida Statutes section 768.1256 provides for a rebuttable presumption in the . . .

EMERSON, v. NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION,, 446 F. App'x 733 (6th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 768.1256 (West 2010). . . .

In FOSAMAX PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION v. Co., 742 F. Supp. 2d 460 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . . § 768.1256. . . . Ann. § 768.1256(1). . . . Id. § 768.1256(2). . . . .

In TRASYLOL PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION- MDL- To, 763 F. Supp. 2d 1312 (S.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . . § 768.1256, (1) In a product liability action brought against a manufacturer or seller for harm allegedly . . .

In WELDING FUME PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, 245 F.R.D. 279 (N.D. Ohio 2007)

. . . . § 768.1256(1) ("In a product liability action brought against a manufacturer or seller for harm allegedly . . .