Product Liability Law Blog

A recent California car crash involving a woman whose car ended up partially falling into an elevator shaft after she crashed it into a martial arts studio has our auto products liability attorneys wondering if sudden unintended acceleration played a role. Gerry Young says that her Toyota Prius wouldn't stop even after she took the keys out of the ignition. The motor vehicle accident occurred last Thursday.

Young was stuck in the car in the elevator for almost an hour. Fortunately, she was able to get free before the elevator went down, partially crushing her vehicle.

As our auto products liability attorney have written about in the past on our blog, the problem of sudden acceleration has been cited in many wrongful death and personal injury cases against Toyota. This safety issue involves vehicles accelerating suddenly and rapidly while the driver is unable to slow or stop the car.

Toyota has recalled over 10 million vehicles since 2009 because of problems linked to sudden unintended acceleration, as well as other safety issues. The automaker has paid the US government more than $30 million for failing to notify them about safety issues in a timely manner. Innocent motorists have also been blamed for causing accidents that were not their fault.

Recently, a Toyota-appointed panel said that the car manufacturer still hasn't done enough to tackle these different problems. Ex-U.S. Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater, who heads up the panel, says the group found that the automaker's centralized decision making process and "skepticism and defensiveness" toward consumers has played a huge role in why the recalls were necessary.

Runaway Prius Slams into Mini-Mall in Pasadena, KTLA, May 26, 2011

Toyota Prius crash prompts emergency court filing, Los Angeles Times, May 27, 2011

Panel: Toyota Hasn't Done Enough to Address Safety Issues, Consumer Affairs, May 2011.

More Blog Posts:
Another 2.1 Toyota Vehicles Recalled Over Sudden Unintended Acceleration Problems, Product Liability Law Blog, February 28, 2011

NHTSA Says Electronic Flaws Not Responsible for Toyota Sudden Acceleration Accidents, Product Liability Law Blog, February 9, 2011

Toyota Sudden Acceleration Lawsuit Filed in Missouri Wrongful Death at Carwash, Product Liability Law Blog, January 19, 2011

Continue reading "Another Toyota Sudden Unintended Acceleration Accident?: Prius Crashes Into Mini-Mall, Trapping Driver in Elevator" »

The Consumer Product Safety Commission is recalling about 1 million spa and pool drain covers due to worries that they may still pose entrapment and drowning dangers to swimmers. The drain covers were supposed to meet the new standards established by the federal government in 2008, which are supposed to prevent a person from getting suctioned into the drain. Unfortunately, many of the drains have the wrong flow ratings. This defect could cause serious injury should a swimmer become involved in a drowning accident after getting caught in the drain.

The companies that made the recalled the drain covers are Color Match, A & A Manufacturing, Hayward Pool Products, Rising Dragon USA, AquaStar Pool Products, Pentair Water Pool and Spa, Custom Molded Products, and Waterway Plastics. CPSC chairwoman Inez Tenenbaum has requested that public pools with the recalled covers shut down temporarily so that the items can be repaired, inspected, and/or replaced.

A defective drain cover can allow the suction from the drain to pull a swimmer into it, causing him/her to become submerged under water and not be able to surface for air. Kids are especially susceptible to this type of injury accident. For example, the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Act is named after the granddaughter of former US Secretary of State James Baker the III. Virginia was just seven when drowned after she got caught in a hot tub drain. Adults, however, have also died because they got entrapped in a pool or spa drain.

Throughout the US, our products liability lawyers represent clients who have suffered serious injuries or lost a loved one in a swimming pool or hot tub accident caused by drowning or drain entrapment.

8 manufacturers recall pool, spa drain covers, Sacramento Bee, May 31, 2011

Waterway Plastics Recalls Certain Drain Covers Due to Incorrect Ratings
Covers Pose Possible Entrapment Hazard to Swimmers, CPSC, May 26, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Pool Safety

Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Safety Act

More Blog Posts:
CPSC and HSC Report 172 Child Drownings and Over 180 Nonfatal Swimming Accidents in US Pools and Spas Since Memorial Day Weekend, Product Liability Law Blog, September 8, 2010

Child Drowning Accidents: Reminder to Parents and Pool Owners to Take Steps to Prevent Swimming Accidents This Summer, Product Liability Law Blog, June 27, 2010

CPSC: Almost 300 US Children Under Age 5 Drown in Pools and Spas Each Year, Product Liability Law Blog, May 27, 2009

Six-Year-Old Girl Whose Intestines Were Ripped Out by Swimming Pool Drain Dies, Product Liability Law Blog, March 24, 2008

Continue reading "About 1 Million Pool and Spa Drain Covers Recalled Over Possible Entrapment and Drowning Concerns" »

The Consumer Product Safety Commission and importer Dream on Me are recalling about 22,000 drop-side cribs because of the dangers they pose to young children. The portable and full-size cribs reportedly may have defects that could cause suffocation, entrapment, laceration, and fall injuries.

The CPSC and Dream on Me know of 69 reports of incidents caused by crib defects or a crib malfunctioning. One infant, 8-months, sustained a minor injury from the exposed plastic hardware inside one of the portable cribs. Another child, age 1, sustained a scratch to his nose when he got stuck between another portable crib's side rail and mattress support.

The full-size cribs are made with hardware that could fail or break, which could cause its drop side to detach. If this happens, a child might fall out of the crib or get caught between the mattress and the drop side rail, resulting in an entrapment accident that could lead to suffocation, traumatic brain injury, or death. Meantime, the portable crib's drop side rail might also detach because its hardware, as well as the material that makes up the the drop side's release latch, and crib mattress support are not durable enough to prevent easy breakage. Also, in the event that the crib slats were to detach, break, or become loose, a child could sustain a cut injury from the exposed hardware.

The full-size Dream on Me cribs that are being recalled were made between January 2006 and December 2009. The portable cribs were manufactured between August 2007 and February 2009.

Our child injury lawyers are fierce advocates for families whose children have gotten hurt because of a crib defect. Over the years, we've watched as manufacturers have recalled millions of cribs because of the hazards they pose to kids. It is unacceptable a crib to be dangerous for use. Fortunately, the US government's ban on drop-side cribs, which goes into effect next month, will prevent many more hazardous cribs from being made. That said, there are many drop-side cribs that are still in use.

Dream on Me Recalls Drop-Side Cribs Due to Entrapment, Suffocation, Laceration, and Fall Hazards, CPSC, May 24, 2011

Product recall: some 22,000 Dream on Me drop-side cribs recalled, The Washington Post, May 24, 2011

CPSC's ban on drop-side cribs takes effect in June, USA Today, June 16, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Dream on Me

What Are The Safety Issues With Drop-Side Cribs?

More Blog Posts:
CPSC Bans Drop-Side Cribs and Approves New Crib Safety Standards, Product Liability Law Blog, December 18, 2010

Colorado Infant Death Prompts CPSC to Re-Announce Recall of Delta Enterprise Drop-Side Crib Over Safety Peg Defect, Product Liability Law Blog, March 27, 2011

Toddler's Parents File Massachusetts Crib Defect Lawsuit Seeking Wrongful Death Damages, Product Liability Law Blog, January 14, 2011

Continue reading "22,000 Dream on Me Drop-Side Cribs Recalled Because They Pose Laceration, Entrapment, Suffocation, and Fall Hazards" »

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission says consumers should stop using phil&teds USA "metoo" clip-on table top chairs because a child could fall or amputate his/her finger while seated in certain ones. The clip-on chairs are made by phil&teds USA Inc. The federal agency says that it knows of a number of incidents involving the chairs. If any of the children were hurt, their families may have a products liability case against the manufacturer.

The nylon fabric seat is a chair for babies and toddlers. Two metal vise clamps are used to attach the chair to a table. However, in the event that a chair was to detach from the table while a child is in it, he/she could sustain impact or head injuries. A clip-on chair can detach if the clamps become separated from the table or a child in the chair pushes against an object with his/her feet. The inadequate amount of space between the clamps and the metal bar on the chair may cause amputation, laceration, crush, or pinch injuries if a child's fingers get stuck between the clamp and the bar if the chair does detach.

Although the chairs that the warning refers are those that don't have plastic spacers between the front horizontal metal bar and the table clampsm those that do are also being evaluated. The CPSC says that it did not approve the free repair kit that the company is offering. It also says that the marketing and packaging materials that show the clip-on chair being used in ways that could cause it to detach from the chair don't warn of the dangers.

As our child injury lawyers have reported in the past, fingertip amputation is one of the more common types of hand injuries to children. This injury can lead to infection, loss of feeling or motion, and even permanent fingertip loss. The risk of head injury is also a common one for young children who are more prone to fall accidents than older kids and adults.

CPSC Alert: Consumers Urged To Stop Using phil&teds USA Clip-on Chairs Due To Serious Dangers Posed To Children, CPSC, May 6, 2011

Gov't warns kids' tabletop chairs not safe, AP, May 6, 2011

Related Web Resources:
phil&teds USA

Fingertip Injuries/Amputations, AAOS

Falls, Preventing Injury

More Blog Posts:
Recall of 1.5 Million Graco Strollers Following Fingertip Lacerations and Amputations, Product Liability Law Blog, January 20, 2010

Graco Recalls 2 Million Strollers After Four Infant Deaths, Product Liability Law Blog, October 21, 2010

Injuries to Children: Maclaren Recalls About 1 Million Strollers After Children Injured During Finger Amputations, Product Liability Law Blog, November 10, 2009

Continue reading "CPSC Warning: phil&teds USA Clip-on Chairs are Fingertip Amputation and Fall Hazards to Kids" »

Richard Taylor is seeking personal injury compensation from General Motors LLC and driver Angela Carrell. Taylor contends that the 2006 Cadillac CTS that he was riding in had a defective air bag on the front passenger side that failed to deploy during a car crash. He says that as a result, he sustained injuries to his neck and back, as well as head lacerations. GM has recalled the vehicle.

According to Taylor's auto products liability lawsuit, Carrell, who was driving the Cadillac, lost control of the vehicle, causing it to violently strike a metal guardrail. Yet despite the severity of the collision, the front passenger air bag did not deploy, failing to protect him.

Taylor claims that General Motors did not properly inform Carrell that the Cadillac had an air bag defect or advise the authorized dealership to fix the problem. He also contends that the automaker made and distributed the car without remedying the safety issue.

Air Bag Defects
Air bag defect lawsuits usually involve air bags that fail to deploy, those that deploy but not in time to prevent a vehicle occupant from getting hurt, air bags that deploy but with too much force, or air bags that go off accidentally. These defects can cause serious injuries—even death—while depriving vehicle occupants of the necessary protections that they need during a collision. Auto manufacturers should be held liable for any defect that places someone's safety at risk.

It can be tough to identify what type of safety issue caused your air bag problem. This is why you need to work with an experienced auto products liability law firm that knows how to comprehend "black box" data and the physical evidence from the crash, as well as work with the proper reconstruction experts.

Suit against GM claims air bag failed to deploy , SETexasRecord, May 2, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Air Bags, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Q & A Airbags, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

More Blog Posts:
Honda Expands Air Bag Recall with Another 833,000 Vehicles, Product Liability Law Blog, May 3, 2011

Auto Products Liability: US Supreme Court Sends Window Defect Lawsuit Against Ford and Seat Belt Defect Case Against Mazda Back to the States, Product Liability Law Blog, March 4, 2011

More than 19 Million Autos Recalled in 2010 in About 600 Campaigns, Product Liability Law Blog, December 29, 2010

Honda says it is recalling 833,000 more vehicles to fix an air bag defect that can cause these safety devices to deploy so forcefully that injury or death can result. The automaker has recalled nearly 1.7 million vehicles since the initial recall in 2008. Yesterday's announcement was its fourth action over the problem.

The air bags pose a safety hazard if they deploy with too much pressure and cause the casing to rupture. Honda, however, has been quick to note that only about 2,400 of the vehicles recalled this time actually pose a hazard. Apparently, the recalled air bags, instead of the correct units, were installed in these autos. The car manufacturer says it hasn't been able to track down these cars, which is why it announced this large recall.

Latest vehicles recalled include Honda Accords and Civics (some 2001 and 2002 models), Odysseys (2002 models), Acura 3.2 TL's (Some 2002 and 2003 models), Acura 3.2 CL (some 2003 models) and CRV (some 2002 and 2003 models). The first recall in 2008 involved only 3,900 Civics and Accords (2001 model). In 2009, Honda recalled another 444,000 vehicles, including Civics (2001 models) and some Acura 3.2 Tls and Accords (2001 and 2002 models) over the same air bag problem. Last year, Honda expanded the recall once more with another 378,000 autos. Among them were Civics and Accords (2001 and 2002 models), CR-V and Odyssey (2002 model), Pilot (2002 model) Acura 3.2 CLs (2003 model) and Acura 3.2 TLs (2002 and 2003 model).

Honda says the air bag defect has led to two deaths and a "small number of injuries." Company spokesperson Chris Martin, however, said that these were not the cause of the latest recall.

The air bags in your auto need to work properly and be free of any defects that could cause serious injury to passengers. This means having air bags that deploy at the appropriate time, rate, and pressure and don't go off when they aren't needed.

As our air bag defect lawyers have reported in the past, faulty air bags can cause serious injuries to the head, brain, neck, spine, internal organs, and other parts of the body.

Honda recalls 833,000 more cars for dangerous air bags, USA Today May 3, 2011

Honda Expands Air-Bag Recall to 833,000 Additional Vehicles, New York Times, May 3, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Air Bag Safety Issue Prompts Ford to Expand Recall of F-150 Pickup Trucks to 1.2 Million, Product Liability Law Blog, April 14, 2011

Auto Products Liability: US Supreme Court Sends Window Defect Lawsuit Against Ford and Seat Belt Defect Case Against Mazda Back to the States, Product Liability Law Blog, March 4, 2011

Big Day for Auto Recalls: Toyota Recalls 437,000 Lexus and Prius and More than 7,300 Camrys while Honda Expands Previous Airbag Inflator—Related Recall with Another 437,000 Vehicles, Product Liability Law Blog, February 9, 2010

Continue reading "Honda Expands Air Bag Recall with Another 833,000 Vehicles" »