Some products are dangerous not because they malfunction, but because they contain hidden allergens that can cause serious reactions. CACI No. 1206 explains how California juries evaluate strict liability claims involving products that contain allergenic ingredients but fail to provide adequate warnings.
This instruction applies to non-prescription products, including food, cosmetics, household goods, and consumer products.
What Is CACI No. 1206?
CACI No. 1206 applies when a plaintiff claims a product was defective because it failed to warn of potential allergic reactions caused by an ingredient. The focus is on whether the ingredient posed a danger to a substantial number of people and whether consumers would reasonably expect that ingredient to be present.
Unlike general failure-to-warn claims, this instruction is tailored specifically to allergenic ingredients.
Full Text of CACI No. 1206
CACI No. 1206. Strict Liability – Failure to Warn – Products Containing Allergens (Not Prescription Drugs) – Essential Factual Elements
[Name of plaintiff] claims that the [product] was defective because it lacked sufficient warnings of potential allergic reactions. To establish this claim, [name of plaintiff] must prove all of the following:
- That [name of defendant] [manufactured/distributed/sold] the [product];
- That a substantial number of people are allergic to an ingredient in the [product];
- That the danger of the ingredient is not generally known, or, if known, the ingredient is one that a consumer would not reasonably expect to find in the [product];
- That [name of defendant] knew or, by the use of scientific knowledge available at the time, should have known of the ingredient’s danger and presence;
- That [name of defendant] failed to provide sufficient warnings concerning the ingredient’s danger or presence;
- That [name of plaintiff] was harmed; and
- That the lack of sufficient warnings was a substantial factor in causing [name of plaintiff]’s harm.
New September 2003
How Juries Evaluate Allergen Warning Claims
Under CACI 1206, jurors focus on several key questions:
- Is the ingredient allergenic to a substantial number of people?
- Would an ordinary consumer reasonably expect that ingredient to be present in the product?
- Was the allergenic danger known or scientifically knowable at the time of manufacture or sale?
- Were the warnings missing, inadequate, or unclear?
- Did the lack of warning substantially contribute to the plaintiff’s injury?
If those elements are proven, strict liability may attach.
Legal Foundation for Allergen-Based Failure-to-Warn Claims
California recognizes failure to warn as a core strict liability theory within the broader products liability doctrine established by Greenman v. Yuba Power Products.
Manufacturers and sellers are responsible for warning consumers of non-obvious dangers, including allergic risks, when those dangers are known or scientifically knowable at the time of sale.
Illustrative Example
A cosmetic product contains a nut-derived oil known to trigger severe allergic reactions, but the label does not disclose its presence. If a consumer suffers an anaphylactic reaction after foreseeable use, a jury may find the manufacturer strictly liable under CACI 1206 for failing to provide adequate allergen warnings.
Practical Considerations in Allergen Cases
These cases often hinge on:
- Ingredient sourcing and formulation records
- Industry and regulatory knowledge about allergen risks
- Labeling practices and warning placement
- Prior complaints or adverse reaction reports
Discovery frequently focuses on what the manufacturer knew—or should have known—about the ingredient’s risks.
Speak With a Product Liability Lawyer
If you were injured by a product that failed to warn of allergenic ingredients, you may have a strict liability claim under CACI No. 1206. WIN Injury & Accident Trial Lawyers can evaluate your case and explain your legal options under California law.
Free consultation. No fee unless we win.
Get Help From WIN Injury & Accident Trial Lawyers
Why Legal Representation Matters
Insurance companies often undervalue pain and suffering—offering minimal settlements that ignore your daily struggles. A skilled attorney can:
- Present powerful evidence of your emotional and physical suffering
- Retain expert witnesses to quantify your losses
- Use verdict data to justify higher multipliers or per diem rates
- Argue your case persuasively before a jury
At WIN Trial Lawyers, our team fights to ensure that your recovery reflects the full extent of your suffering—not just your bills.
At WIN Trial Lawyers, we know how personal injury claims can be can be. Victims often face mounting medical bills, lost wages, and emotional trauma. Our team has successfully taken on insurance companies and third parties, recovering millions for injured clients.
If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident, don’t leave your future in the hands of the insurance company. You need experienced trial lawyers who know how to prove liability and fight for maximum compensation.
If you or a loved one has been injured, don’t face this alone. The sooner you act, the stronger your case will be.
