Articles Posted in Defective Products

An automaker may have covered up a defect in its vehicles that put motorists and passengers at grave risk of serious injuries and even death, according to the latest accusation against one vehicle manufacturer.throttle

It’s not the first time car makers have been accused of such actions. In some cases, these accusations have been proven, and car makers have had to pay out millions upon millions of dollars to injured victims and surviving loved ones – often for defects that were known for years but never addressed.

In this case, the allegation in the case before the California Southern District Court is that the electronic throttle body control systems cause the vehicles in question to suddenly – without warning or driver intention – decelerate. This in turn results in a potentially lethal situation in which the vehicle suddenly slows down wherever it happens to be. If a situation like this occurs on the highway, it could be deadly.

Continue reading

For many women, the use of cosmetics is part of their everyday routine. Most of the time, those products are used without incident. However, there are some times when manufacturers or distributors of these products fail to make sure the items are safe for use as intended. This can result in burns, scarring, allergic reactions, and infections. In terms of cost, it may leave consumers grappling with emotional distress as well as medical expenses, lost wages, and other economic and non-economic costs. makeup

By law, companies have to adhere to product safety standards when designing, manufacturing, and distributing their products. A failure to do that that results in an injury can be grounds for a product liability lawsuit.

A recent study by the Environmental Working Group found that products made for and marketed to black consumers are markedly less safe than those produced for other consumers. An examination of 1,177 personal care and beauty products sold to black women indicated one in 12 was considered “highly hazardous” on the environmental group’s scoring system.

Continue reading

Ethicon, a corporate subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, has faced a number of lawsuits related to the surgical mesh it created and marketed to women who suffered various types of organ prolapse, either due to age or childbirth. The company is still fighting many of those cases, although it settled thousands just this year. woman

Now, the company is accused of making a defective product intended for patients suffering from hernias. This product too is a type of mesh, and the allegation, similar to the transvaginal mesh lawsuits, asserts the product does not perform as expected, adheres to internal tissue in a way that causes incredible pain and dysfunction, and makes it very difficult to remove during necessary revision surgery.

The hernia mesh goes by the brand name Physiomesh. The latest of these Physiomesh lawsuits was filed in a federal court in Florida. According to the Florida Record, there have only been four of these product liability lawsuits filed so far, but it’s anticipated that many more will follow.  Continue reading

A burn injury victim may proceed with part of his product liability lawsuit against the manufacturer of a paint removal product that reportedly burst into flames when he was using it as directed. fire extinguishers

A recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Suarez v. W.M. Barr & Co. held that while the trial court was right to grant summary judgment to the defendant on the “failure to warn” claim, the claims asserted on grounds of strict liability and negligence should be allowed to proceed.

Product liability cases can be complex and typically require a law firm with extensive experience and ample resources. Such claims can proceed on a number of legal theories, but each must meet very specific criteria. Although there are federal statutes governing the standards to which product makers and distributors are held, many of these cases are filed in state court and are based on state-level standards, which can vary by jurisdiction.

Continue reading

A woman and her husband are seeking $300 million in damages in a product liability lawsuit against the maker of a robotic surgical system that she says nearly killed her and caused her excruciating pain and suffering, as well as lifelong medical ailments.doctor

In Zarick v. Intuitive Surgical Inc., plaintiff alleges the surgical system caused her severe internal injuries when doctors relied on it to perform a hysterectomy.

This case is one of the first to go trial against this defendant, which characterizes itself as the worldwide leader in minimally-invasive, robot-assisted surgery. These procedures are conducted with a surgeon sitting at a console near the patient, looking through a viewfinder and moving a joystick-like controller to move the robotic arms of the device. This particular device alone is used in some 200,000 surgeries a year.

Plaintiff reports that the system botched her 2009 surgery, causing her intestines to protrude through her vagina. She was rushed to a nearby emergency room and was forced to undergo a high-risk surgery that required a hip-to-hip incision. Plaintiff, 44, and her husband are asking for $50 million in economic damages and another $250 million for emotional distress, pain and suffering, loss of consortium and loss of life enjoyment.  Continue reading

Defective and dangerous products cause thousands of injuries in the U.S. annually. Product liability laws define the parameters concerning who may be held responsible when a dangerous or defective product causes injury to a person. ammo

Parties that may be held potentially liable include product designers, manufacturers and distributors – anyone in the chain of distribution.

But what if one of these responsible entities is based outside the U.S.? After all, a great many of the products we use are produced outside our borders.  Continue reading

When we think of potentially injurious products, chairs aren’t often first on the list. rockingchair

But in the last three months, there have been a series of chair recalls of various types of seats with the potential to put users at risk of a fall.

Although one might think a fall from a chair isn’t a serious matter, it’s important to note the way a person falls can be as important as how far they are falling.

So for example, someone falling 12 feet off a ladder may break an arm, if they extend the arm to cushion the fall. However, a person falling backward on a chair and smacking their head on concrete may suffer a skull fracture or traumatic brain injury – even if the fall height was only a few feet.  Continue reading

Drugs and medications are often the source of product liability claims that stem from patient injury or illness. Although all pharmaceutical companies have a duty to make sure their products are properly tested under U.S. Food and Drug Administration guidelines, the fact that a drug is approved does not shield the manufacturer from liability if the drug proves defective. girlinnature

Many of these cases involve failure to warn. That is, while some products may be unavoidably unsafe (the drug is unsafe no matter how carefully its made, but it still has benefits), the company has a duty to adequately warn users of those dangers. This can be accomplished by directing warnings to “learned intermediaries,” such as the doctor or pharmacist.

Product liability lawsuits are often complex and challenging. Recently, the Arizona Supreme Court issued a ruling that may make it somewhat easier for victims of defective drugs in that state to bring claims against drug companies that fail to make safe drugs or adequately warn of the risks.  Continue reading

A jury in Georgia has ordered medical device manufacturer Wright Medical to pay $11 million in the first federal trial concerning the Conserve hip implant. Of that sizable award, $1 million was in compensatory damages, intended to compensate plaintiff for losses, and $10 million was in punitive damages, intended to punish defendant. skiing

Jurors concluded not only was the hip implant defective and unreasonably dangerous, but that manufacturer misrepresented the safety of those products. For this, jurors determined defendant was 100 percent at fault for plaintiff’s injuries.

Plaintiff, who spent nearly 50 years as a children’s ski instructor and led a very active lifestyle, was advised by doctors to undergo a hip replacement in 2006. Her doctor, based on what he’d been told by manufacturer, told her the metal-on-metal hip replacement model was her best bet. But as we have discovered with so many hip replacement devices, this one failed prematurely. Continue reading

A $6.6 million verdict in favor of an asbestos injury plaintiff was reinstated after the Florida Supreme Court ruled an appellate court had wrongly reversed the trial court’s conclusion of the case. dust

Plaintiff in Aubin v. Union Carbide Corp. was diagnosed with peritoneal mesothelioma, a form of terminal cancer caused by exposure to asbestos. Plaintiff claimed he was exposed to the toxic material by way of a product called SG-210 Caldria, a product designed and manufactured by defendant. He had worked as a construction supervisor at his father’s firm between 1972 and 1974, overseeing construction of a residential development in South Florida, and claimed it was during this time he was exposed to the dust during the sanding and sweeping of drywall compounds and ceiling texture sprays, which contained SG-210 Caldria.

At the time, plaintiff asserted he did not know the compounds he was working with contained asbestos, and therefore had no idea he was at risk of developing the serious illness. Continue reading

Contact Information