Photo of Jean Gabat

Jean Gabat

Jean zealously advocates for clients in litigation. She practices from Easton, Pennsylvania as a member of our virtual office, The Link.

Follow:Read more about Jean GabatJean's Linkedin Profile

The electric vehicle (“EV”) revolution is reshaping the automotive industry, promising a greener future and reduced reliance on fossil fuels. However, as EV adoption accelerates, manufacturers face a growing legal and regulatory challenge: the risk of lithium-ion battery fires, which has sparked a wave of product liability lawsuits and regulatory scrutiny in recent months. For EV manufacturers, understanding the legal implications of these issues and proactively addressing safety concerns is critical to mitigating liability and maintaining consumer trust.

“With great power comes great responsibility,” and in the rapidly evolving landscape of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”), the intersection of innovation and legal responsibility is becoming increasingly complex. As AI becomes more integrated into products and services across industries, matters regarding liability, regulation, and safety are raising questions about the tension between AI and liability. Courts must apply existing legal frameworks to this emerging technology while lawmakers play catch up and enact guardrails to ensure its safe and lawful use. This article explores the implications of AI in the context of product liability, focusing on recent litigation and potential theories of liability that companies must navigate as AI continues to permeate every sector of the economy.

The recent wave of lawsuits against TikTok by over a dozen states and the District of Columbia[1] marks a significant moment in the ongoing scrutiny of social media platforms and their impact on youth mental health. The lawsuits allege that TikTok’s design and algorithm are intentionally addictive, contributing to various psychological harms among young users.

Gold wedding rings with golden bokeh background. Banner for design with copy space.Generative AI

In Ripple v. CBS Corporation, et. al., the Florida Supreme Court held a surviving spouse is entitled to recovery for wrongful death under the Florida Wrongful Death Act (the Act), codified at Fla. Stat. §§ 768.16-768.26 (2015), even if their marriage to decedent occurred after decedent’s injury. This ruling has significantly redefined the scope of wrongful death claims and supersedes a longstanding common law doctrine in Florida that historically barred such recoveries.