Arizona

The wave of litigation targeting Apple over its AirTag tracking devices is a useful case study for any company that manufactures or sells a product that could conceivably be misused by a bad actor. In a case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, a “Jane Doe” plaintiff alleges that a former romantic partner used AirTags to track her on at least three occasions in 2025 by concealing devices inside a suitcase and tablet, which were ultimately used to locate and take their daughter in violation of a custody order. The plaintiff alleges negligence, strict liability, invasion of privacy, and a violation of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. In
August 2026, U.S. District Judge Marcia Morales Howard struck the complaint as an impermissible “shotgun pleading” and directed the plaintiff to file a corrected version. However, the underlying theories of liability remain at issue and are illustrative of a broader trend among plaintiffs seeking to hold manufacturers responsible for the deliberate criminal conduct of third parties.

The proverbial hacksaw inside a prisoner’s birthday cake has been supplanted by a new technological trend for bringing contraband into the jailhouse – Unmanned Aircraft Systems (“UAS”). As early as 2015, a fight broke out at the Mansfield Correctional Institution in Ohio when a drone carrying tobacco, marijuana, and heroin crashed into a yard inside the facility. That same year, a drone trafficking hacksaw blades, a cellphone, and Super Glue crashed into a maximum security prison in Oklahoma. Similar plots have been attempted in more than a dozen states nationwide, leading states like North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas to ban drone flights over correctional facilities. Perhaps to save us from another pre-emption fight over UAS operational restrictions, the federal government is now following suit.

May 2, 2016
New Developments
Northern District of Illinois Decision on Take-Home Exposure Liability has Limited Application
By Lindsay McClure-Hartman

The Northern District of Illinois in Neumann v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC, No. 15-C-10507, 2016 WL 930662 (N.D. Ill. March 10, 2016), recently granted a motion to dismiss on the basis that a product manufacturer