Idaho Law Blog

Mahoney Law, PLLC of Idaho provides product liability law firm services to those seriously injured by unreasonably dangerous and unsafe products.  Our product liability attorney assists individuals and families who have suffered injury or death due to unsafe products, with either manufacturing defects or design defects.  Mahoney Law’s product liability lawyer helps you investigate and determine if a claim or lawsuit is appropriate for injuries or death from products that malfunction and cause catastrophic harm.    

Personal injury from a product can take many forms, and can arise from many different types of products.  Burn injuries, amputation injuries, paralysis, severe lacerations, inhalation injuries, as well as tragic wrongful death situations can all be caused by unsafe consumer products.  The full range of products have been implicated in injuries and death, from vehicles, to home consumer products, to dangerous equipment used on the job, to recreational products and equipment as well.

Some product liability law basics are as follows.  First, each state will have its own time deadlines within which to take legal action on any sort of personal injury or wrongful death case, including those due to product liability.  Idaho usually has a two year statute of limitations, but that can vary depending on the situation and the age of the claimant.  There may also be a so-called “statute of repose” that may govern how old of a product can give rise to a valid lawsuit.  Second, most states have statutes that apply to product liability cases.  For example, in Idaho, we have the Product Liability Reform Act:  This sets forth certain technical, legal details that apply to injury and death cases due to product liability as to which the law firm you hire should have good knowledge.  Third, federal regulations may apply to a product liability claim involving personal injury or wrongful death, depending on whether the manufacturing of the product is subject to federal regulation.  A common example of this are various federal motor vehicle standards, which may give rise to the sometimes complicated legal doctrine of “federal preemption,” wherein product manufacturers argue that state law claims cannot be brought due to the existence of federal standards. Fourth, state courts as well as federal courts have decided cases involving product liability.  That case law may have precedential effect on a new product liability case as to which your attorney should be familiar.  Fifth, very generally speaking, the person bringing the product liability personal injury lawsuit or product liability wrongful death claim must prove through their lawyer that a product is unreasonably dangerous, defective, and/or that a failure to provide adequate warnings is involved.  This is usually done through evidence of malfunction and expert witness testimony, typically by engineering experts and human factors experts with expertise as to the subject area at issue.  

Here are a few of the types of product liability cases that Mahoney Law’s product liability lawyer has handled:

·      Flammable fabric case involving ignited clothing and severe burns to a child

·      Defectively designed archery equipment that impaled the hunter’s hand 

·      Defectively designed yard maintenance equipment that impaled the user’s leg

·      Unsafe cleaning chemicals that exploded and burned the user’s eyes

·      Unreasonable dangerous pharmaceutical drug that caused severe renal failure and death

·      Hair removal laser case involving a failure to warn and eye injury

·      Severe injuries due to a manufacturing defect in a bicycle frame

·      An auger used on the job that did not have proper guarding leading to the near amputation of the user’s arm.

If you, a family member, loved one, or friend has suffered personal injury or wrongful death due to an unsafe product, please do not hesitate to contact us here at Mahoney Law in Idaho for a free, and confidential review to determine if there might be a product liability case.


Many potential new clients understandably want to know how the lawyer in a personal injury case gets paid.  The same thing is true on medical malpractice cases where injured patients ask about how the attorney for the patient is compensated.  Whether it is a brain injury case, an automobile collision claim, or a medical malpractice lawsuit, lawyers who handle these types of cases on behalf of the plaintiff are typically paid on what is referred to as a “contingency fee” basis.  That is simply a fancy way of saying they are paid on a commission.  Simply put, under this type of arrangement, the lawyer is only paid an attorney fee out of any amount recovered for the client.  The attorney fee is a percentage of the amount collected, with the percentage usually depending on the difficulty of the case and the stage in the process it reaches.  


Clients usually want to know what the justification for a continency fee is, in other words why is it fair?  The main alternative to a contingency fee is to pay a lawyer on an hourly basis, which is very expensive, anywhere from, for example, $200 per hour up to $500 per hour our more depending on the location, which can equate to thousands upon thousands of dollars over the course of a case (which is usually how large corporations or big insurance companies pay their teams of multiple lawyers from larger law firms).  Most people understandably cannot afford this, or are simply not in a position financially to where they are willing to pay that much to a lawyer to take on a complex and lengthy case with hundreds or thousands of hours of attorney work.  Another reason for a contingency fee arrangement is that it transfers some of the risk of loss to the lawyer.  In other words, some cases present a risk of loss; nothing is certain in litigation.  An experienced lawyer may be willing to take on that risk in exchange for a percentage of the outcome for attorney fees, rather than have the client pay hourly and risk paying a large amount for attorney fees yet losing the case.  So, the lawyer agrees to potentially get paid later, if successful, in the future, based on an uncertain outcome.  There is also the matter of litigation costs and expenses, such as for expert witnesses, depositions, and trial costs.  These out of pocket costs must be paid as the case moves forward and can amount to many thousands of dollars.  Typically, under a contingency fee arrangement, the lawyer advances these to be paid out of any amount recovered for the client.  So, the continency fee provides some incentive for the lawyer to take on the business risk of advancing these litigation costs.  


The bottom line is that contingency fee arrangements allow lawyers to help people who are otherwise not in a position to pay hourly, or who are unable to advance thousands of dollars of litigation expenses and costs, or who cannot incur the financial strain of potentially losing the case.  This type of payment arrangement therefore makes sense and allows ordinary people to take on much larger adversaries who are attempting to avoid reasonability and deny justice based on perceived economic superiority.  Mahoney Law of Idaho has a track record of success in representing ordinary Idahoans wage extraordinary battles.  Call us for a free and confidential consultation.                

Clients and prospective clients often ask us, “are medical malpractice cases hard to win?”  “Can I win a medical malpractice case at trial?”  Or, “I heard medical malpractice cases were impossible for a patient to win, is this true?”  While there are many different ways to go about analyzing the answers to these questions, and no approach is perfect, one way is to review the medical malpractice verdict results in Idaho over time.  


Going back over approximately the last fifteen years, we find numerous plaintiff-patient medical malpractice verdicts for substantial dollar amounts.  Since 2005, there have been 21 reported medical malpractice jury trials in Idaho, in venues all over the state.  13 of those were for the plaintiffs.  8 of those were defense verdicts.  Based on this data, albeit a small sample size and albeit a review of only those cases that have actually gone to trial, plaintiffs (patients) are, on average, winning these cases at trial more than they are losing them, at approximately a 62% win rate.  The dollar amounts are also relatively large, ranging from $600,000 on the low end to $7.9 million on the upper end.  


Looking at this data set, the conventional wisdom that these cases are impossible for plaintiffs, or even harder than average for plaintiffs to win, is simply not accurate, and the assertion that Idaho has low dollar amount verdicts in these cases is demonstrably false.  All too often the defense inaccurately takes the position that these cases are hard to win in Idaho as a general matter.  Such an inaccurate risk assessment may result in the defendant healthcare provider later finding themselves subject to a substantial verdict and judgment.  A high dollar money judgment can possibly be excess of the healthcare provider defendant’s medical malpractice liability insurance policy limits -- a scenario that raises questions about conflicts of interest on the part of insurance defense counsel and bad faith conduct on the part of the insurance company.


Dollar amount of plaintiff verdicts in medical malpractice cases in Idaho by venue and date:


10/19: Idaho Falls $893,422

2/19: Ketchum $619,000

4/18: Idaho Falls $7.9 million

2/18: Boise $2.2 million

5/17: Boise $632,000

6/16: Twin Falls $3.8 million

9/14: Boise $3.7 million

8/14 Boise $1.1 million

11/13: Boise $1 million

10/11: Coeur d’Alene $760,000

4/09: Caldwell $4.2 million

4/06: Boise $6 million

A head injury of any type can potentially be devastating and life altering.  We understand that here at Mahoney Law of Idaho.  Our brain injury lawyer will work with you to fully document and present the extent of your injury.  Our concussion attorney will seek assistance from qualified and experienced experts to prove the impact of the concussion on your life.  As a head injury law firm, we work to develop the facts as to why the opposing party was negligent or reckless in causing  your brain injury so you receive the money damages to which you are fairly entitled under the law.  Traumatic brain injury law in Idaho is one of our areas of focus and we have helped clients here in Idaho with all types of TBIs, from concussions to severe blunt force head trauma.  YouTube Video Link:

In the personal injury context, where the opposing side may be liable to pay money damages for causing an injury, brain injuries can have numerous causes.  There are many different types of brain injury cases, TBI claims, concussion lawsuits, and head injury litigation handled by an attorney.   Car accidents, truck collisions, slip and falls, falling merchandise and falling objects, heavy equipment accidents and the like can all cause serious brain injuries wherein the at fault party may be liable to pay damages in a civil lawsuit brought by a lawyer.  Each case must be investigated and evaluated by the law firm to see if it is meritorious.  Mahoney Law handles all types of head injury, brain injury, TBI, traumatic brain injury, closed head injury, and concussion cases and claims in Idaho.  Working with well qualified neuropsychological experts is a critical part of developing a brain injury claim, whether it be for a severe TBI lawsuit or a concussion insurance claim.   Such experts will perform testing as to various aspects of brain functioning.



Given our vast experience in representing TBI clients, we have learned to disprove several common myths and misperceptions that the defense sometimes tries to raise to deny our clients fair monetary recovery.  For example, it is well established that entire categories of head injuries will not show up on MRI scans, CT imaging, and of course X-ray.  Although somewhat of an oversimplification, this is because the level of the brain damage can be so microscopic that it simply does not show up based on our current brain imaging technology.  


Another common myth or misperception we often hear in concussion cases is that there should be a set time after which you should be healed, recovered, and back to normal.  This is not accurate.  Some brain injuries heal quickly, others take a more mid-level amount of time, while other closed head injuries can take years to heal and the victim may even have permanent deficits that are life altering.  There is no correct or normal amount of time for healing from a TBI.  Likewise, the time for healing does not necessarily depend on the perceived severity of the injury.  For example, a closed head brain injury from the brain simply moving violently within the skull may actually take longer to heal than a concussion from a direct force blow to the head.  


Speaking of which, another inaccurate assertion we often confront from the defense and insurance companies is that there must be a direct blow to the head, blunt force trauma, for a victim to sustain a brain injury.  This is false.  It is well known that very serious TBIs can be suffered simply from the victim’s head violently moving back and forth or side to side, without actually striking the head, such as may happen to a restrained passenger in a motor vehicle collision.   Simply because you do not have an external bump, wound, or cut on your head does not mean an individual does not in fact have an internal brain injury.  Similarly, there does not have to be a loss of consciousness (LoC) for there to be a very real brain injury.  


To recap, a brain injury victim may be clinically diagnosed with a TBI despite normal imaging, with no loss of consciousness, with no direct blow to the head, and may have a protracted recovery period or may have permanent impairment.  Brain injury law involves recognizing these issues and assisting our clients accordingly.  


A concussion, brain injury, TBI, closed head injury, or the like can affect the victim’s work, personal relationships, hobbies, activities, and day to day enjoyment of life.  The symptoms can be overwhelming and debilitating, and can include some or all of the following:

·      Headaches

·      Dizziness

·      Vertigo

·      Balance problems, unsteadiness

·      Audiology problems, ringing in ears

·      Memory issues, recall problems

·      Speech and language issues such as word finding 

·      Light sensitivity

·      Blurry vision

·      Sleep issues

·      Nausea and vomiting 

·      Confusion

·      Motor functioning impairments, trouble walking 

·      Temperament changes, emotional changes, anger issues

·      Executive functioning limitations 

·      Problem solving impairments 


Under Idaho law, we work to obtain full compensation for our concussion injury clients.  We work with appropriate experts to obtain neuropsychological testing to document the extent of the issues our TBI clients face.  If the brain injury has caused a loss of income and time off work, and potentially future employment impairment, we work with qualified vocational and economic experts to document this to recover this important component of damages on our head injury cases.  We place the largest emphasis on what are referred to as general damages, in other words the human harms and losses that closed head injury victims suffer.  From physical pain, to emotional difficulties, to impaired relationships, to a very real impact on the enjoyment of day to day life, we communicate with you so as to be able to show the opposing side and jury at trial this, the largest part of the damages. 


Mahoney Law has successfully represented brain injury victims in Idaho.  In one case, a bundle of boards fell on our client’s head at a large home improvement store.  The victim was diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury and suffered ongoing balance problems.  In another case, our client was rear-ended at a stop sign before an intersection.  The opposing driver was in a large fuel truck that slid on ice while the driver was on his cell phone.  Our client sustained a severe head injury due to the force of the impact and suffered from memory loss, headaches, and emotional difficulties.  Both of these cases were settled for substantial dollar amounts after we properly investigated the liability facts and proved our client’s physical and mental damages.  We have handled numerous other brain injury related claims here in Idaho. 


If you, a family member, friend, or loved one is in need of legal help for a brain injury, concussion, closed head injury, head injury, or TBI, please reach out to Mahoney Law here in Idaho.  We have been compassionately serving Idahoans for 25 years.  Sometimes these cases can be settled before a lawsuit is filed.  As a brain injury law firm, we work directly with the at fault party’s insurance company to secure you full and fair recovery to the maximum extent under the law.  Sometimes, however, a lawsuit is necessary as the opposing insurance company may undervalue our client’s claim.  As a concussion law firm, we are ready, willing, and able to litigate your case for full justice through a head injury lawsuit. 



Here are links to brain injury resources:  Brain Injury Association of America


Idaho’s two largest hospital systems have traumatic brain injury and concussion programs:  The Mayo Clinic on traumatic brain injury symptoms and causes  The CDC on traumatic brain injuries 

Idaho's statutory "cap" on non-economic damages is here:


It is currently $386,622.39 and amounts to a government imposed limit, sought after by the insurance industry, on the freedom to have a jury decide the limit for injury victims here in Idaho.  Absent a showing of reckless conduct, discussed below, special interest lobbies in Idaho have thus limited pain and suffering for someone, by way of example, paralyzed for life by another’s negligence to about $380,000 under the current formula. This is immoral and unjust as that figure comes nowhere close to the fair-trade value for such harm.  Absent a showing of recklessness, for another example, a family who loses their young child due to negligence of another is limited to $380,000 per claimant for loss of a loved one.  This is inhumane as that figure does not remotely balance the scales of justice for such a loss.  What those who insure and defend negligent actors have attempted to do is take from Idaho citizens the right to dole out justice in accordance with the true human harms and losses.  What this has really done, as discussed below, is shift the margin of debate to the issue of reckless conduct.   



The cap applies on a per-claimant basis, in other words, to each plaintiff separately.  Historically, the defense industry in Idaho had taken the loathsome position that the cap was per lawsuit, regardless of the number of injured victims.  It took a trip to the Idaho Supreme Court to set the insurance industry straight on what was obvious to reasonable individuals from the start of this very unreasonable limit on jury damage awards.


The cap is lifted and does not apply in cases where reckless conduct is shown and found by the jury at trial, as per Idaho Code §6-1603.  In this sense, the cap really is not a cap at all in the event there is reckless conduct at issue.  In cases where there is reckless conduct, it is a misrepresentation for the defense to claim that the "cap" is the "maximum allowed" by law.  If the cap is lifted, there is no maximum.  The days have long past where cases are settled without the defense paying a premium on cases where there is a material likelihood a jury will find reckless conduct, given the enormity of exposure such a finding poses for the defendant (possibly in excess of the defendant's liability insurance policy limits).


Idaho Code §6-1601(10) defines reckless conduct as "conduct in which a person makes a conscious choice as to the person’s course of conduct under circumstances in which the person knows or should know that such conduct both creates an unreasonable risk of harm to another and involves a high probability that such harm will actually result."


The Idaho Supreme Court has routinely upheld cases wherein Idaho's cap on general damages was lifted by the jury finding reckless conduct in cases involving medical malpractice and personal injury.  Of course, given the facts, juries are willing to label reckless conduct as such, and award far in excess of the artificial damages limit set by statute as a result of special interest lobbies, ranging from liability insurers, healthcare insurers, and hospital and healthcare associations – which is really what the arbitrary statutory cap was designed to protect at the expense of victims of negligent conduct. There have been numerous cases in Idaho wherein juries have sided with claimants found reckless conduct, such that the statutory cap on general damages was lifted, including in reported cases with total damages ranging from $3 million to nearly $8 million.  So, although insurance companies, corporations, hospitals, and healthcare providers often like to invoke and hide behind what is really an immoral and inhumane statute, all the while claiming to be benevolent, Idaho juries are not afraid to do the right thing and find reckless conduct where the facts support it, especially in the medical malpractice and serious personal injury context.  

For a free, no obligation consultation with Mahoney Law