The Ups and Downs of Elevator and Escalator Litigation

Elevator and escalator incidents occur for many reasons.  In litigation, most elevator/escalator incidents fall within two separate and distinct legal categories: (1) Products Liability (e.g., manufacturing defect, design defect, or inadequate warning); or (2) Premises Liability (e.g., negligent installation, maintenance, or repair).  In the first, manufacturers and downstream sellers may be liable for designing, manufacturing, or selling a defective elevator/escalator.  In the second, property owners and maintenance providers may be liable for failing to safely maintain the elevator/escalator after it is manufactured and sold.  

Litigation will often run concurrently along both paths, with products claims asserted against the manufacturing defendants, and premises claims against the owners and maintenance contractors, until there is sufficient discovery and expert review to ascertain whether a viable claim exists under either theory.  This course, presented by Scott Kagan and V. Christopher Potenza, will identify the preliminary steps to determine if there was a defect that was the cause of the injury, and if that defect was present at the time of sale or arose out of improper maintenance or neglect.  We will provide a framework of some of the potential defects, causes of action, and defenses that may arise in elevator/escalator accident litigation.

Learning Objectives:

1. Identify Common Elevator/Escalator Defect Allegations
   A. Elevators (e.g., mis-levels, sudden door closures, and sudden acceleration/deceleration)
   B. Escalators (e.g., sudden acceleration or stops, comb plate defects, and side skirt defects)
2. Identify Causes of Action in Strict Products Liability and Defenses
   A. Manufacturing Defect
   B. Design Defect
   C. Inadequate Warnings/Labeling
3. Identify Causes of Action in Premises Liability and Defenses
   A. Res Ipsa Loquitur
   B. Notice Requirements