Orlando Personal Injury Lawyer - Defective & Dangerous Products

Are Manufacturers Liable If I am Injured by Their Product?

Sandy Grinnell — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:23:18 GMT

Injured by a piece of equipment or product you were recently using? Then you might be eligible to bring a product liability suit against the manufacturer, supplier, or retailer depending on where you got the product. Product liability is the area of law that holds these businesses liable for the injuries that their products cause to the public. Most product liability cases are based of negligence, strict liability, breach of warranty, and consumer protection claims. These laws vary from state to state and from claim to claim. There are three major types of product liability claims: a manufacturing defect, a design defect, and a failure to warn or a marketing defect.

Strict Liability focuses on the product itself. Under this theory the manufacturer is liable if the product causes injury regardless of whether the product itself was defective. The courts look for facts in individual strict liability cases which characterize warranty from the manufacturer to the consumer, be it an expressed or implied warranty. Expressed warranties are those which are noted on the product during purchase whereas implied warranties are those which are common to all products in that category. Strict liability, unlike negligence, does not require the manufacturer itself to be negligent in production. In negligence the plaintiff must prove that the manufacturer or distributor fell below a standard of care. However strict liability focuses only on the product itself.

States are also enacting consumer protection statutes for specific remedies in regards to product defects. Statutory remedies are enacted for products that do not necessarily cause injury but simply are defective or unusable but still cause an economic loss. This only allows the consumer to recover for the economic loss of the product but no damages to their person.

No consumer should ever be injured by a product that a manufacturer holds out to be safe for public use. If you or anyone you know has been injured from a recent purchase or product they were using, please don’t hesitate to contact someone for legal representation.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Sandy Grinnell

Theme Park Injury Caught on Video

Ed Normand — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:00:00 GMT

Knott’s Berry Farm in Buena Park, California, billed as "America’s 1st Theme Park" was the site of another ride accident in mid-September, 2009. Riders were struck with debris and two passengers were injured, after a cable on the ride snapped. Luckily, no one else was injured during the accident. Incredibly, the entire ordeal was caught on video! A 12-year-old boy suffered lacerations on his leg, and an adult male complained of back pain afterwards. In the video, you can clearly see the point in the video where the cable breaks, and the ride starts going backwards. The fear and confusion on the eyes of the riders is evident, especially once smoke starts emanating from underneath the ride. The riders begin to panic at the end of the video, as they realize they are strapped into the ride, and unable to get out. The video, posted on Youtube, provides an eye-opening insight as to what happens when a ride malfunctions.

www.youtube.com/watchhttp://www.youtube.com/v/6EGHHjN0bQs&hl=en&fs=1&"> name="allowFullScreen" value="true">http://www.youtube.com/v/6EGHHjN0bQs&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344">

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Injuries on Disney Rides and Attractions: Second Quarter 2009

Ed Normand — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 06:05:00 GMT

Recent filings by Disney to the Florida Bureau of Fair Ride Inspection show 11 reported injuries on attractions or rides at Disney World theme parks in Florida during the second quarter of 2009. This time period includes the busy Easter and March Break holidays, where theme parks in Central Florida typically see a surge of visitors. In exchange for reporting any significant injuries (defined as needing a hospital stay for longer than 24 hours), theme parks such as Disney are exempted from state ride-safety regulations.

Disney World is comprised of four different parks: Magic Kingdom, Epcot, Hollywood Studios, and Animal Kingdom, as well as two water parks: Blizzard Beach, and Typhoon Lagoon.

The injuries are as follows:

A 7 year-old boy was injured when he fell and broke his arm while attempting to exit one of the ride vehicles at Tomorrowland Indy Speedway at Magic Kingdom. The ride is described as allowing guests to "steer and control the speed of your own racecar as you ‘lap’ up the excitement of this thrilling speedway."

A 77 year-old man became disoriented and sick and needed medical attention after riding Expedition Everest at Animal Kingdom, described as a "high-altitude, high-speed, roller coaster train ride . . . to the ‘Roof of the World,’ . . ."

Two people were injured at Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster at Hollywood Studios: the first was a 48 year-old woman who felt weak on her left side after the ride and had trouble standing, the second was a 55 year-old man who experienced chest pain after going on the ride. Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster is described as a "high-speed roller coaster for big kids, teens and adults,. . . amplified by the driving beat of a soundtrack recorded by the rock group Aerosmith specifically for [the] attraction."

A 57 year-old woman lost consciousness after going on Mission: SPACE at Epcot. Mission: SPACE is advertised as "realistically mimic[ing] what an astronaut might experience during a space flight to Mars." As part of the experience, riders experience forces of up to 2.4 Gs.

A 69 year-old woman experienced pain in her side after riding Soarin’ at Epcot, which "simulates a peaceful hang-gliding flight over the Golden State of California" as you are "lifted 40 feet into the air."

A 57 year-old man became dizzy after going on Ellen’s Energy Adventure at Epcot, a "multimedia attraction starring comedian Ellen DeGeneres", which invites guests on "a whimsical trip through time to examine the forces that fuel our lives and the universe . . ."

A 39 year-old man had a seizure while on Splash Mountain at Magic Kingdom, which allows riders to experience "twists, turns and 3 dips that lead to the grand drop down 5 stories of rushing water [that] will either get you damp or drenched."

A 64 year-old woman became disoriented and lightheaded after going on Teamboat Springs, a 1,200 feet long raft ride at Blizzard Beach Water Park that "is one of the longest family raft rides in the country, giving you a nice long, invigorating journey down the river."

A 43 year-old woman experienced stomach and chest pain after going head-first down Toboggan Racers, also at Blizzard Beach Water Park, described as "an 8-lane waterslide race on toboggan-style mats", claimed to be "an avalanche of fun!"

Finally, a 52 year-old woman became disoriented and sick after going down the Rudder Buster Storm Slide at Typhoon Lagoon, one of three "twisting, winding waterslides [that] whisk Guests down 3 stories at surprising speed."

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Medical Device Product Immunity Gets Another Look

Ed Normand — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:20:00 GMT

In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court in Riegel v. Medtronic ruled that a manufacturer could not be held liable if its medical device was defective, even when the device is recalled, as long as the device was approved by the Food and Drug Administration before it hit the market. Medtronic recently issued a recall for malfunctioning pacemakers, the majority of which have been implanted in patients for five years or longer. Last month, the FDA notified affected patients that these defective pacemakers may cause fainting or lightheadedness, and other symptoms associated with an abnormal heart rate. In rare cases, the FDA stated that serious injury or even death could result. More than 21,000 pacemakers have been recalled, and Medtronic is recommending the removal of the affected pacemakers. Under the 2008 Supreme Court decision, Medtronic is protected against liability because the pacemaker was approved by the FDA pre-market.

Congress is now considering legislation entitled The Medical Device Safety Act of 2009, introduced by Henry Waxman (D-CA), Chair of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Chair of the Health Subcommittee. The Act seeks to overturn the 2008 Supreme Court decision, and give consumers the right to hold manufacturers liable through product liability lawsuits filed at the state level. Consumers would be able to seek compensation for pain and suffering, lost wages and medical expenses resulting from injuries caused by a medical device, or caused by inadequate safety warnings. The Act would put the safety of consumers first, and eliminate the broad immunity from liability that medical device manufacturers enjoy. Manufacturers would have an obligation and an incentive to ensure the ongoing safety of their products, and not rest on their laurels after FDA approval.

The Medical Device Safety Act of 2009 has the support of the New England Journal of Medicine, the American Bar Association, and the AARP, among others. Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, have introduced a companion bill in the U.S. Senate.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Fitness Balls Burst, Injure People

Diego Madrigal — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:52:37 GMT

Our fellow IB blogger, Joe Saunders, has a very interesting post on his blog dealing with Fitness Balls exploding and causing injury to people. These ball are usually used to strengthen the "core." A number of these balls have been recalled due to the risk of injury. I was first made aware of this months ago when a player from the Florida Gators basketball team was hurt while doing a bench press with dumbells while balancing on a fitness ball. He broke both wrists. This clued me in that there might be something wrong with the balls, because I am sure the training staff at UF kept the balls with the required and recommended air pressure.

Many people do not just use the balls for situps, but also use weights while on the balls. This can lead to very serious injury, as demonstrated by the UF basketball player. Another person may not have been as lucky and had the weights drop on their head, injuring their head, neck, or even brain.

Again, I am all for free enterprise, but makers of deffective products should be held accountable when their products do not meet up to the standards and cause injury to people. Being held accountable is the best way to ensure companies keep improving their products in both quality and safety.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Diego Madrigal

Strict Liability or Negligence?

Ed Normand — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:53:51 GMT

According to the Associated Press, a business that stores molasses-based cattle feed is being sued by neighbors for allowing 10,000 gallons of the substance to leak from a tank at Performance Plus Idaho.

The plaintiffs are owners of an auto repair shop where the molasses allegedly coated the tires of 14 vehicles causing damages of $81,000 dollars. The plaintiffs have filed suit and alleged that Performance Plus was negligent and failed to properly store and transfer the molasses.

This case illustrates the various legal theories that can be used in pursuing a claim . The Plaintiffs sued under a theory of common law negligence. That is that the defendant's negligence in storing the molasses was the cause of the leak and damage to the cars. One could also argue that the legal cause of action based on strict liability applies here. Under this claim the plaintiffs do not have to show fault (negligence), if they can prove liability should be imposed on the business for harming Plaintiff by keeping large quantities of a hazardous substance on their property with no reciprocal benefit to the plaintiff. The reason behind this legal method of recovery is that the business is in a much better position to take the special precautions to avoid this exact kind of disaster, and if they fail, they should be responsible even if the Plaintiff cannot prove exactly how the company was negligent in the storage of the molasses.

While we hope that noone pours molasses on our cars, we are aware that things like this happen and we are thankful that we have a legal system that allows for recovery when we are hurt or our property is damaged through no fault of our own.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Theme Park Injuries Where the Ride Worked As Intended

Ed Normand — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:02:00 GMT

Lately we have been seeing inquiries from folks injured on theme park rides where the ride was operating as intended. Case in point, a visitor from England who sustained injuries including a compression fracture of the lumbar spine while riding on a water slide. She did nothing wrong, followed all instructions and yet was permanently damaged. As one would expect, the theme park lobby has effectively kept this type of information hidden from the public. A County Fair ride that caused such an injury would result in a report of the injury and a State inspection. The big theme parks in Florida are legally exempted from reporting an incident like this because of a loophole that allows the big three theme park companies to not report injuries if the person is not immediately sent to an emergency room and is admitted overnight or dies.

The law also favors the big theme parks. A rider injured on a ride must prove that the park was negligent in the way it operated or maintained the ride or in the warnings provided to customers. Of course, the only one who knows if the ride was not operated correctly on the date and time of the injury is the park operator. Since they have no duty to report the injury there is no timely investigation to prove negligence. The theme park can then do a Sergeant Schultz (remember from Hogan's Heroes: "I know nothing........"). More likely they will blame the visitor claiming they must have done something wrong. Florida law should be changed to make a theme park operator subject to the same legal standard as a product manufacturer, that is the the theme park operator is strictly liable for an injury that occurs on a ride when the rider was following ride instructions. After all if the ride is not safe to be used as intended then the park should be responsible for the injuries caused by the ride. If the ride is safe, as they advertise, then they will have nothing to worry about with a legal standard of strict liability.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Does Chinese Drywall Devalue Florida Homes?

Ed Normand — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:17:29 GMT

Chinese manufactured drywall imported in Florida was installed in new housing in Florida. The drywall is reportedly not well made and becomes brittle and breaks down. The drywall emits a noxious sulfur like odor and may be causing problems in copper in homes and air conditioning units. It has now been reported that Chinese drywall may be causing health problems and building defects in those homes. Most alarming is the potential health danger.

“It certainly does raise concerns,” said Dr. David Krause, toxicologist for the state Health Department. “There may be a direct health threat.”

According the the Hawaii Injury Board Blog those most at risk from the drywall are children, the elderly and residents with respiratory conditions.

The nasty smells alone may render a home inhabitable. That smell coupled with the potential health concerns will surely reduce the value of the homes that have the drywall installed. After all no one wants to live in a home whose walls may emit dangerous fumes. The manufacturers of these products should be required to replace the drywall and repair the homes to the condition that they would have been in had more quality drywall been used. Florida homeowners should insist on nothing less.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Whole Peanut Recall Adds More Items to FDA Recall List

Sandy Grinnell — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:07:51 GMT

The FDA has reported that the salmonella outbreak previously thought to involve only bulk peanut butter and peanut paste from a plant in Georgia has now been expanded to include whole peanuts. Most of the peanut product recalls issued by the FDA today have been for products containing whole peanuts, such as breakfast bars, trail mix, and dry and honey roasted peanuts. The ever-expanding list of recalls can be found on the FDA's website.

As the recall list continues to grow each day, according to CBS news, the Department of Justice has opened a criminal investigation to determine if there are any criminal violations associated with the contamination. According to FDA documents, The Peanut Corp. of America, Blakely, GA, knew of on least 12 occasions there was the presence of salmonella in the plant just since 2007.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Sandy Grinnell

Peanut Butter Recalls List of Recalled Products

Ed Normand — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:08:00 GMT

We have been asked to provide a list of the products that have been recalled due to the peanut butter Salmonella infection. Sadly, the list is too long to print here but it is available from the CDC. Check the CDC website at: http://www.fda.gov/oc/opacom/hottopics/salmonellatyph.html#products

for a list of the infected peanut butter products.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand