Product Liability Law Blog

At the Gilbert Law Group, PC, we believe that kids' safety is nonnegotiable especially when it comes to consumer products that are designed specifically for them. Over the years, our child products liability law firm has helped many families recover compensation from negligent manufacturers, distributors, and sellers that endangered the lives of children, teenagers, and babies by making, releasing, and selling consumer goods that were dangerous or defective.

Unfortunately, unsafe products continue to cause injury and deaths to children. Just this month, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has announced a number of recalls of kids' products because of the hazards that they pose.

Last week the CPSC recalled about 31,000 Tumblekins Toys that could cause laceration and choking injuries. All Tumblekins play sets and toy vehicles are included in the recall. The federal safety agency is concerned that the toys can break into small, sharp pieces that can easily cut a child or may be easy for him/her to swallow.

The distributor of these toys is International Playthings LLC. The manufacturer is Lishui Treetoys Trading Co. Ltd. There has so far been one report of a toy breaking up into small pieces. There are no reports of injuries so far.

Whenever a manufacturer or distributor acts right away to notify the government about a product defect so that an immediate recall can be made, lives may have been saved and injuries prevented. Unfortunately, not all companies may know of a safety defect until many people have already gotten hurt. Some manufacturers may even delay reporting the hazard in order to keep making money.

Earlier this month, the CPSC recalled about 28,000 Bumbleride Indie & Indie Twin Strollers over worries that the front wheel of the stroller may crack, causing the stroller to tip and the child seated to sustain fall injuries, including head injuries. So far, 36 incidents involving the front wheel cracking have been reported. Two reports noted that the stroller tripped over, causing the riders to sustain minor injuries. The CPSC, in cooperation with importer Bumbleride Inc., is asking consumers to stop using these twin strollers right away.

Also this month, the CPSC, in cooperation with manufacturer and importer Weeplay Kids LLC, recalled about 128,000 Carter's Watch the Wear Bodysuits and Sleep 'n Play Garments because the detachable snaps on the clothing's fabric could pose a potential choking hazard to young children and babies. Fortunately, no one appears to have gotten hurt by clothing defect so far, but there have been about 30 reports of the snaps coming off the garments.

Considering that young children and babies are known to be more at risk of choking--infants and toddlers, especially are prone to put things in their mouth while unaware that they may be endangering themselves should they swallow. Our products liability lawyers are here to help children and their families recover the child injury compensation that they are owed.

Tumblekins Toys Recalled by International Playthings Due to Choking and Laceration Hazards, CPSC, February 16, 2012

Recall of Bumbleride Indie & Indie Twin Strollers, ABC Local, February 3, 2012

128,000 Carter's infant bodysuits and garments recalled for choking dangers, Consumer Reports, February 3, 2012

More Blog Posts:
Consumer Groups Coalition Ask CPSC to Recall Bumbo Baby Seat, Product Liability Law Blog, February 7, 2012

Clothing Defects: Apparel Industry Must Follow Standards for Children's Loungewear and Sleepwear, Says CPSC, Product Liability Law Blog, January 18, 2012

Can Loud Toys Impair Children's Hearing?, Product Liability Law Blog, January 12, 2012

U.S. PIRG, the Consumer Federation of America, Public Citizen, Kids in Danger, and Consumers Union have written a letter to the US Consumer Product Safety Commission asking it to recall the Bumbo Baby Seat. Used to prop babies in a sitting position before they can do so on their own, millions of parents have bought this infant product for their babies. However, the Bumbo Baby Seat has also been linked to many fall accident-related injuries. A number of child products liability lawsuits have been filed as a result. Baby ages 3-to-10 months were affected.

For example, one couple filed a Texas products liability lawsuit after their 9-month-old son sustained a skull fracture when he fell out of his seat. Lucy and Kevin Ferrell said that when their son arched his back, he ended up flipping sideways out of the seat, onto the table, and off it. Retail Toys R Us has even named a defendant for knowingly carrying an infant product linked to injuries.

While the CPSC is aware of the safety risks involved, they have not put out a recall since 2007 even though the number of infants injured from the Bumbo seats has continued to grow. At least 45 babies have fallen from the infant chairs when they'd been placed above ground level. Also, there are reports of at least 17 babies sustaining skull fractures since the 2007 recall. Another 50 got hurt while getting out of the Bumbo seats that had either been placed on the ground or at an undocumented height. It doesn't help that the Bumbo seats can tip over easily. Also, according to the CPSC, even when used according to the directions provided, there are babies still getting hurt because of their Bumbo seats.

The consumer groups are concerned that serious injuries are happening even when the product is used for the purpose intended and in the correct manner (on the ground, not on an elevated surface.) They also noted that while there are no testing requirements or safety standard for this kind of product, unlike Bumbo International other manufactures of similar infant products have changed their design to address the safety risks involved. Almost 4 million Bumbo baby seats have been sold in the US since the last 9 years.

Skull Fractures
A skull fracture is usually caused by a severe blow or impact. Depending on the type of fracture it is, brain injury may even result.

There is no reason why a product designed for babies shouldn't be safe for them to use. For skull fractures or other injuries to occur when the product is used as directed is inexcusable.

Feds Issue Warning on Bumbo Baby Seats as Injuries Mount, The Consumer Chronicle, November 23, 2011

Bumbo recall urged by consumer groups, Boston, February 7, 2012

Did Bumbo ignore child safety profits?, Reuters, December 14, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Registering Your Kid's Products Can Help You Find Out About Dangerous Defects, Product Liability Law Blog, December 12, 2011

New Crib Safety Standards Go Into Effect Today, Product Liability Law blog, June 28, 2011

Crib Bumpers: Are They Safe for Babies?, Product Liability Law blog, April 30, 2011

Continue reading "Consumer Groups Coalition Ask CPSC to Recall Bumbo Baby Seat" »

The death of freestyle skier Sarah Burke after sustaining a traumatic brain injury during a training accident is once again raising questions about the dangers that can arise when someone is moving swiftly through snow or ice and is involved in an accident. Granted, while freestyle skiing tends is a lot more high-risk than other sports, there are dangers involved in regular skiing, ice hockey, speed skating, sledding, snowboarding, and tobogganing. The question is, how much does protective gear and clothing actually protect people from catastrophic injuries?

Discovery.com reports that some studies show that while boots, helmets, bindings, and other safety gear do decrease the risk of serious injuries, these products have their limits. There are even products, such as the wrist guards used by snowboarders, that don't offer any actual benefits. A person that is wearing them may even be worse off in certain accidents.

Also, despite the fact that manufacturers are continuing to develop new protective gear, the rate of snow sport deaths hasn't declined in 40 years. Granted, skiiers that don't use helmets are more likely to die from a head injury, but there are also helmet users that are dying from trauma sustained by the body as a result of high-speed impact during a fall or from colliding into a tree. Also, a helmet doesn't provide protection from spinal cord injuries.

In a study published in the Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics last week, simulated tobogganing crash tests done on helmets to test for side and front impacts at varying meters/second found that bicycle helmets offered the most protection at the highest velocity. Ice hockey helmets were best able to offer protection at lower velocities. Alpine helmets provided the worst protection of all three helmet types during both high and low impacts. However, at over impacts of 4 meters/second, all helmets exhibited damage to the inner liner and cracks.

It is important that all safety equipment warn of any risks involved when using a product. Manufacturers must also make sure not to market safety gear to make it appear as if it provides more protection than what is actually does. Safety equipment and clothing should also be free of defects that could cause it to malfunction and/or not provide the protection it is supposed to give the wearer.

Our products liability lawyers represent both children and clients that have sustained traumatic brain injuries in incidents involving defective products and other catastrophic accidents. Contact The Gilbert Law Group today to schedule your free case evaluation.

Helmets vary in offering protection for winter sports and play, Los Angeles Times, January 20, 2012

Sarah Burke, Freestyle Skier, Dies From Injuries in Training, New York Times, January 19, 2012

Sarah Burke's Death: Can Gear Keep Up with Skiers?, DiscoveryNews, January 13, 2012

Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics

More Blog Posts:
Head Injury Risk Prompts Triple Eight Distribution to Recall 30,400 Bicycle Helmets for Kids, Product Liability Law Blog, January 6, 2012

Do Toning Shoes Cause Foot Injuries?, Product Liability Law Blog, June 8, 2011

Defective Clothing Can Cause Serious Injuries, Product Liability Law Blog, June 19, 2008

Continue reading "Will Your Helmet Prevent a Traumatic Brain Injury During a Winter Accident?" »

The US Consumer Product Safety Commission has sent a letter to distributors, manufacturers, retailers, and importers emphasizing the importance of them abiding by Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA) and the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008. Children's sleepwear is defined by the CPSC as apparel ranging from size 0 to 14 that is supposed to be worn mostly for sleeping or during sleep-related activities. (Infant garments, which are for kids younger than 10 months, underwear, diapers and certain clothing that are tight-fitting do not fall under the children's sleepwear category.)The kind of fabric that the clothing is made of, the way the sleepwear is distributed and promoted, and the likelihood of it being bought for and used by kids are also key factors in determining whether a piece of clothing would be considered kids' sleepwear. For the Commission, children's loungewear is clothing used mainly for sleep-related activities.

The sleepwear standards regarding flammability were established so that kids' clothing doesn't ignite when exposed to candles, lighters, matches, stoves, ranges, fireplaces, and space heaters. Such unfortunate accidents have been known to happen to children wearing flammable loungewear/sleepwear (usually) right before bedtime or in the morning after breakfast. Unfortunately, despite the existing regulations, there are clothes that pose a fire hazard risk yet still end up in the marketplace.

When clothing is made of material that is more likely than other fabrics to catch fire, the person wearing the clothes can end up sustaining serious burn injuries, especially as the flames are more likely to spread quickly through flammable material. Also, the material that the clothing is made from can melt into the person's skin, exacerbating the burns even further.

Disfigurement, permanent scarring, infection, and death may result from wearing flammable clothing that catches fire. A person lucky enough to survive such an accident may have to undergo serious, painful surgeries, skin grafts, and other procedures. They also may sustain emotional and psychological scars that can impair a person's ability to live a normal life.

Factors that can impact how fast clothing can ignite include:

• The type of material and fibers that the clothing is made from
• The design of the clothing. For example, longer and looser the clothing is the greater the risk of it brushing against any nearby flames.

Our clothing defects lawyers are familiar with the severe burns that can result from flammable clothing. We represent children and adults who were seriously injured because of defective and dangerous products.

CPSC Reinforces Children's Sleepwear and Loungewear Enforcement Policy to Apparel Industry Agency standards designed to prevent burn injuries to children, CPSC, December 23, 2011

Read more about the CPSC's sleepwear standards (PDF)

Read the CPSC's letter (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Ex-Pro Football Players Sue Helmet Maker Riddell and NFL for Traumatic Brain Injuries and Products Liability, Product Liability Law Blog, August 31, 2011

CPSC Says Certain Kids' Outerwear with Drawstrings Pose Strangulation, Entrapment and Death Hazard to Kids, Product Liability Law Blog, July 18, 2011

Defective Clothing Can Cause Serious Injuries, Product Liability Law Blog, July 19, 2008

Continue reading "Clothing Defects: Apparel Industry Must Follow Standards for Children's Loungewear and Sleepwear, Says CPSC" »

UC Irvine researchers from its otolaryngology department are saying that the sounds coming from toys that make the loudest noises have been known to hit decibel levels similar to sounds made by a subway train or a chainsaw. 10 toys that are popular among kids were tested for loudness.

The toys' sound levels were measured while the objects were placed next to a speaker and from 12 inches away (the typical length from a toddler's head to his/her hand.) Researchers say that these two distances are representative of the way that young children handle such toys--at arm's length and held up to their ear. Per the study, some toys, including the Road Rippers, Tonka Mighty Motorized Fire Engine, and T-Pain Mic hit 100 decibels or higher when placed next to a speaker. At a 12-inch distance, the same toys reached decibels in the mid- to upper-60's, which the American Academy of Otolaryngology reports is the level of noise a car might emit for someone observing the vehicle at a close distance. Noise/Sounds from the following toys when placed near a speaker hit the 90 decibels and higher range:

• Sesame Street Let's Rock Elmo
• VTech Princes Magical Learning Wand
• Toy Story Buzz Lightyear Cosmic Blaster
• Marvel Super Shield Captain America

Considering that hearing loss can result from noise louder than 85 decibels, and, per study director Dr. Hamid R. Djalilian, young children are likely to place a toy emitting noise next to their ears to confirm the source of the sound, are these toys safe for use? If you believe that your child suffered hearing loss or any other injury as a result of a toy or another product, you should speak with a products liability lawyer immediately to find out whether you have a child injury case on your hands.

Djalilian said that most toys that make noise, if used properly, shouldn't pose any danger to kids. However, the researchers are recommending that a speaker on any toy should be located on its bottom side. They are also suggesting that buyers test toys that emit noises to make sure they aren't too loud before purchasing them.

According to the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, toys that make noises so loud that they can potentially cause hearing damage include certain cap guns, toy vehicles with sirens or horns, walkie-talkies, talking dolls, toys with cranks, musical instruments, and squeaky rubber toys. Improper use of noisy toys can also up the risk of hearing loss.

It is important that toymakers warn of the risk of potential hearing loss posed by any toy and include instructions for safe and proper use. Hearing loss not only impairs a child's ability to hear and experience the world, but also it may impede speech development, language development, learning, communication, social development, and self-esteem. The repercussions of hearing loss during childhood can seriously impact adulthood.

Study: Improper Use of Noisy Toys May Lead to Hearing Loss for Children, Fox News, December 5, 2007

Study: Toys can be too loud, Daily Pilot, December 22, 2011

Effects of Hearing Loss on Development, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

More Blog Posts:
Prevent Child Injuries This Holiday Season By Avoiding Dangerous and Defective Toys, Product Liability Law Blog, November 23, 2011

Swallowing High-Powered Magnets Can Be Deadly for Kids, Warns CPSC, Product Liability Law Blog, November 6, 2011

Little Tikes Recalls Another 1.7 Million Toy Workshop and Tool Sets Over Choking Hazard, Product Liability Law Blog, October 6, 2011

Continue reading "Can Loud Toys Impair Children's Hearing?" »

Importer Triple Eight Distribution risk is recalling approximately 30,400 bicycle helmets for youth and kids over concerns that they may not protect riders from head injuries during fall accidents. Testing of the helmets revealed that they are not in compliance with Consumer Product Safety Commission Standards.

Considering that a helmet and other safety gear are the only protections that a bicyclist would have during a traffic accident, it is important that it is properly constructed and designed to provide the needed before between the cyclist and the road or a vehicle during impact. Kids should stop using the helmet right away and get in touch with Triple Eight to ask for your money back.

According to statistics on the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute's Web site:
• Of the 630 bicyclists that died in the US in 2009, 74 of them were under the age of 15
• Young bicyclists involved in a traffic crash had a greater chance than adult riders of dying from a head injury
• 75% of bicycle deaths in 2000 involved collisions with motor vehicles
• Also that year, head injuries were a factor in 62.6% of bicycle accident deaths.

At The Gilbert Law Group, we have child injury lawyers who are knowledgeable in the area of catastrophic injury that can help families recover compensation from the manufacturers, retailers, and distributors of dangerous and defective products. Ask to speak with one of our products liability lawyers today.

Unfortunately, traffic crashes are the leading cause of head injuries. A seemingly minor bump can later prove to be something much more serious and permanent.

Symptoms of a possible traumatic brain injury:
• Sudden, uncontrollable drowsiness
• A stiff neck
• Loss of consciousness
• Pounding headache
• Throwing up
• Convulsions
• Sudden inability to hear properly
• Skull fracture
• Changes to your pupils
• Vision problems
• Scalp injury
• Head swelling
• Facial bruising
• Loss of ability to move legs or arms
• Decreased blood pressure
• Slurring your speech
• Confusion
• Disorientation

According to KidsHealth.org, approximately 500,000 kids are seriously injured in US bicycle accidents. Most of these injuries could have been prevented if the children had worn helmets.

It is important that a helmet meet either Consumer Product Safety Commission standards or the ones set by the nonprofit group Snell Memorial Foundation. The helmet should also be well-ventilated, correctly fit your child, and is of a color (fluorescent or bright) that can make it easy for other motorists and bicyclists to see. Once a helmet has been involved in an impact collision, it is a good idea to replace it right away because they can lose their ability to absorb shock.

Bicycle Helmets Recalled by Triple Eight Distribution Due to Risk of Head Injury, The Sacramento Bee, January 6, 2012

Bicycle Helmets Recalled by Triple Eight Distribution Due to Risk of Head Injury, CPSC, January 6, 2012

Bike Safety, KidsHealth

Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute

More Blog Posts:
Choking Hazard Prompts Build-A-Bear to Recall Over 280,000 Teddy Bears, Product Liability Law Blog, December 28, 2011

Prevent Child Injuries This Holiday Season By Avoiding Dangerous and Defective Toys,
Product Liability Law Blog, November 29, 2011

Michigan Products Liability Lawsuit Seeks Wrongful Death Damages Against Nap Nanny Maker, Product Liability Law Blog, November 19, 2011

Continue reading "Head Injury Risk Prompts Triple Eight Distribution to Recall 30,400 Bicycle Helmets for Kids " »

Build-A-Bear Workshop Inc. and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission have announced the voluntary recall of 284,000 Colorful Hearts Teddy Bears. The recall is over concerns that the stuffed doll's eyes might come lose and fall off, creating a potential choking hazard. To date, there have been no reports of related injuries.

The announcement comes shortly after the CPSC fined Build-A-Bear $600,000 over a defective toy beach chair. The fine settles claims that the company allegedly knew that the toys were dangerous long before notifying the CPSC about the product defect.

The CPSC claims that Build-A-Bear started getting reports as early as July 2007 that the toy chairs, which are accessories for their stuffed animals, could cause laceration, pinching, and fingertip amputation injuries in the event that the finger or another part of the body were to get caught in the middle of the wood frame while it was being folded. Build-A-Bear finally reported the defect in March 2009. Prior to that, however, in October 2008 the company stopped selling the chairs and told stores to give the product back to the storage warehouse.

Build-A-Bear says that with over 200,000 toy chairs sold between 2001 and 2008, it had received 10 injury complaints.

Companies must report a product defect that poses a substantial injury risk immediately. The CPSC has taken a tough stance against companies that fail to notify it about any products that pose a serious injury risk. In 2005, Graco Children's Products Inc. was fined $4 million for not notifying the government in a timely manner about over 12 million products that were dangerous to kids.

Notifying the government about a defective product makes it easier for the public to become aware that a product may be dangerous. This may prevent serious injuries from happening.

Build-A-Bear Workshop to pay $600,000 fine in defective toy chair case, Business Insurance, December 22, 2011

Build-A-Bear Recalls Colorful Hearts Teddy Bears Due to Choking Hazard, CPSC, December 23, 2011

Build a Bear

More Blog Posts:
Registering Your Kid's Products Can Help You Find Out About Dangerous Defects, Product Liability Law Blog, December 12, 2011

Prevent Child Injuries This Holiday Season By Avoiding Dangerous and Defective Toys, Product Liability Law Blog, November 23, 2011

Little Tikes Recalls Another 1.7 Million Toy Workshop and Tool Sets Over Choking Hazard, Product Liability Law Blog, October 6, 2011

Continue reading "Choking Hazard Prompts Build-A-Bear to Recall Over 280,000 Teddy Bears" »

Each year, World Against Toys Causing Harm, Inc. puts out its "10 Worst Toys" list as a warning to consumers for products to avoid when shopping for the holiday season. Toys that made this year's list that pose specific child injury hazards include the:

• Twist 'n Sort
• Fold and Go Trampoline
• Power Rangers Samurai Mega Blade
• Pulling Animal Duck
• Z-Curve Bow
• Sword Fighting Jack Sparrow
• "Gigan" Godzilla Figure
• Stepper "Low Rise" Stilts
• The Incredible Shrinky Dinks Maker
• School Bus by Schylling

The dangers involved vary, but include choking hazards, the risk of impact injuries, strangulation risks, electrical shock and burn dangers, and the risk of puncture wounds. Our toy defect lawyers want to remind you that when choosing what toys to buy, consider the age of the child that you are buying for and whether the product is appropriate for their abilities and safe for them to use.

Unfortunately, every year, there are children that end up sustaining serious injuries because they were playing with a dangerous or defective toy. Manufacturers, sellers, and distributors can be held liable for products liability in these instances. There is absolutely no reason why an unsafe toy should be made available in the marketplace.

In addition to its 10 worst list, WATCH wants shoppers to watch out for toys that:
• Don't come with warnings, operating instructions, or age recommendations
• Have hair, fur, and other parts that can be ingested
• Include small pieces that can be easily swallowed (removable attachments, such as bells and beads fall under this category)
• Have pieces that shoot out, potentially posing a safety risk to the eyes
• Have pointed tips or sharp edges that can cut or pierce the skin
• Come with lengthy strings that may pose a strangulation hazard
• Are made with flammable materials
• Pose electrocution hazard
• Include toxic substances, such as lead or phthalates

The Pennsylvania Public Interest Research Group, which releases its annual Trouble in Toyland report each year, says that the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which is responsible for recalling any unsafe or defective toys, doesn't test all toys and not all of those that end up on store shelves meet the safety agency's standards. If you believe there is a dangerous toy out there or your child was injured because of a toy, you should report it to the CPSC, as well as contact our child products liability law firm immediately.

While tougher federal rules and new toy safeguards should mean there are less dangerous toys being sold now than ever before, one unsafe toy in the marketplace is one hazard too many. The CPSC says that last year, there were 17 child deaths involving toys--up from the 15 fatalities in 2009. Almost 50% of these deaths involved choking accidents. Also in 2010, 181,500 kids in the under 15 age group ended up in ERs because of injuries from toys.

2011 Dangerous Toy List, WATCH

Trouble in Toyland, PIRG

Consumer Product Safety Commission

More Blog Posts:
Swallowing High-Powered Magnets Can Be Deadly for Kids, Warns CPSC, Product Liability Law Blog, November 6, 2011

Little Tikes Recalls Another 1.7 Million Toy Workshop and Tool Sets Over Choking Hazard, Product Liability Law Blog, October 6, 2011

Choking, Entrapment, Fall, and Suffocation Hazards Prompt CPSC's Latest Recalls Involving Children and Infant Products, Product Liability Law Blog, April 5, 2011

The parents of a 4-month-old girl who died after she became entrapped in her portable baby recliner is seeking $75K in Michigan products liability damages from manufacturer Baby Matters LLC. The baby, Juliette Thiel, died on July 9, 2010 from asphyxiation.

The infant was found hanging from the Nap Nanny's side while her face had gotten caught between the recliner and the crib bumper. In their Michigan wrongful death complaint, Brian and Mako Thiel accused the manufacturer of failing to make sure there were proper warning labels that came with the infant recliner cautioning against suffocation injuries.

Following Juliette's fatal accident, the Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled 30,000 Nap Nanny recliners. The federal safety agency said the recliners posed fall, entrapment, and suffocation hazards. CPSC and Baby Matters also reported that there had been least one other known incident of a an infant entrapment accident happening while the Nap Nanny was being used in crib. That baby, who fell over the recliner's side, got caught between the Nap Nanny and the crib's side and sustained a head cut. Additionally, 22 reports involving harnessed infants falling out of or hanging over the Nap Nanny's side were filed.

In their Michigan child products liability lawsuit, the Thiels are contending that not only are there two patents indicating that the Nap Nanny was made to be used in a crib, but also, product marketing materials prior to March 2010 promote that the child recliner be used this way. The CPSC has since advised that the Nap Nanny not be used inside a crib, play yard, or another confined space. Placing the Nap Nanny on an elevated surface is also not recommended because the baby might fall out.

The Thiels say that as early as March 2010, the CPSC told Baby Matters it was looking into whether the Nap Nanny had defects. At the time, the manufacturer said denied this. However, the couple says that in May 2010, the CPSC found that the Nap Nanny was defective, came with a harness that did not properly restrain infants or keep them secure, and if used in a crib placed the baby at risk of becoming entrapped and suffocating. Warning labels and directions also were found inadequate. Juliette died two months later. Her parents are seeking over $75,000 in Michigan wrongful death damages.

Manufacturers are supposed to warn of any safety risks that come with using a product. This includes making sure that a product comes with the appropriate warning labels and operating instructions. It would be even better if products did not have any design defects that made them dangerous for children and infants to use--especially while they are asleep and unsupervised.

Couple sues firm in death of infant, The Detroit News, November 19, 2011

Baby Matters Recalls Nap Nanny® Recliners Due to Entrapment, Suffocation and Fall Hazards; One Infant Death Reported, CPSC, July 26, 2010

More Blog Posts:
New Crib Safety Standards Go Into Effect Today, Product Liability Law Blog, June 28, 2011

Choking, Entrapment, Fall, and Suffocation Hazards Prompt CPSC's Latest Recalls Involving Children and Infant Products, Product Liability Law Blog, April 5, 2011

22,000 Dream on Me Drop-Side Cribs Recalled Because They Pose Laceration, Entrapment, Suffocation, and Fall Hazards, Product Liability Law Blog, May 24, 2011

Once again, the Consumer Product Safety Commission is warning parents and guardians to watch out that their kids don't swallow any magnets. The latest advisory focuses on high-powered magnets, in particular, and comes following a rise in the number of related child injuries reported in the past two years.

In 2009, the CPSC says there was just one incident involving high-powered ball-bearing magnets reported. However, that number went up to 7 in 2010 and there have been at least 14 already reported this year. Magnet ingestion occurred in 17 of the incidents, while surgery (including repair to intestines or the stomach) was required to remove the magnets on 11 of the occasions. The person to sustain this type of child injury was 18 months, while the oldest was age 15.

High-Powered Magnets
These magnets and magnet parts are often small enough to swallow and are not allowed to be used in kid and infant products. They can be found in desk toys for adults and/or are used as stress relievers. High-powered magnets are usually sold in 200-piece sets.

Because the small pieces do separate, it is not unusual for a toddler to get hold of one and put it in his/her mouth. Teenagers and younger kids have also been known to swallow or inhale the small magnet pieces either accidentally or on purpose.

Swallowing Magnets
That said, swallowing any kind of magnet can cause serious injuries, including intestinal blockage, holes in the intestines and stomach, blood poisoning, and death. If two magnetic parts are swallowed, they can be drawn toward each other through the walls of the intestine and that is when the serious injuries can occur. This is why it is so important that manufacturers make products that don't pose this type of injury risk.

In April 2007, the CPSC reported that it had received hundreds of complaints of magnet pieces falling out of toys. At the time, it said that it knew of at least 33 incidents involving kids swallowing the magnet pieces and having to undergo emergency surgery. The CPSC even recalled over eight million products with magnet pieces that could come loose.

Our products liability lawyers represent the families of children that were injured by a defective product or one that wasn't designed safely enough to prevent serious injuries or deaths. We know how upsetting it can be to find out that your child got hurt because another party was negligent and we are here to help our clients obtain financial recovery from those responsible.

There are steps you can take to prevent magnet-related injuries, including:
• Keep them away from kids
• Make sure that any small magnet pieces haven't come loose

If you believe your son/daughter may have swallowed a magnet piece, get medical help right away.

CPSC Warns High-Powered Magnets and Children Make a Deadly Mix, CPSC, November 10, 2011

Ingested Magnets Can Cause Serious Intestinal Injuries, CPSC (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Little Tikes Recalls Another 1.7 Million Toy Workshop and Tool Sets Over Choking Hazard, Product Liability Law Blog, October 6, 2011

MEGA Brands and Battat Recall 2.4 Million China-Made Toys with Magnets, Product Liability Law Blog, March 17, 2008

Latest Magnetic Building Kit Recall Is A Reminder That Swallowing Magnets Can Cause Serious Injuries, Product Liability Law Blog, January 29, 2008

Continue reading "Swallowing High-Powered Magnets Can Be Deadly for Kids, Warns CPSC" »

More than two years after recalling approximately 1.6 million Little Tikes™ Workshops Sets and Trucks after an 11-month-old South Carolina boy choked on a toy nail that got stuck in his throat, the manufacturer and the Consumer Product Safety Commission are recalling another 1.7 million units--this time of Little Tikes® Workshop and Tool Sets--over the same child choking hazard posed by the plastic toy nails.

The recall comes after reports of another two child choking accidents involving nails getting lodge in kids' throats. Both incidents occurred before the 2009 recall. Fortunately, all three children were treated at hospitals and fully recovered.

Choking Hazards and Toys
Per the CPSC, in the last 18 years, more than 290 kids have died because of toy-related incidents. Over 55% of these involved choking that resulted in asphyxia. The majority of choking accidents involved toy parts, balls, and balloons.

Most of the kids were younger than age 5, which is not surprising, considering that choking is the number one cause of accidental child death for kids 10 and under. Not only is this because a young child's trachea is so narrow--about the size of a drinking straw in diameter--but also, young kids are especially prone to put small objects in their mouth without realizing how dangerous this can be for them. Over 10,000 children end up in hospital emergency rooms each year for treatment of choking-related injuries.

Examples of toy items that can pose a choking hazard:
• Marbles
• Small parts
• Tiny figures
• Button size batteries for toys
• Crayons
• Small, removeable toy parts

Toys are not the only products that can pose choking hazards. Toymakers and the manufacturers of other products know of this danger and they are supposed to make toys for infants and toddlers that minimize this risk. Unfortunately, products are still getting made that do pose a choking hazard to children. Our products liability lawyers have watched as teething products, rattles, and other items that have had to be recalled because they were small enough that they were too easy to swallow.

Unfortunately, in many instances, safety recalls aren't announced until after someone has already gotten hurt. It is always a good idea to properly supervise your child/monitor the types of toys and other products he/she is allowed to use just in case. For older kids, smaller toys and toy parts should come with the proper warnings of any risks.

Our child injury lawyers represent families whose children were injured because a product was defective or posed some type of safety hazard. You should not be afraid to hold a negligent manufacturer, seller, or distributor liable for products liability.

Little Tikes Expands Recall of Toy Workshop and Tool Sets Due to Choking Hazard, CPSC, September 28, 2011

Children And Choking Hazards, CBS News

Choking Prevention for Children

More Blog Posts:
Choking, Entrapment, Fall, and Suffocation Hazards Prompt CPSC's Latest Recalls Involving Children and Infant Products, Product Liability Law Blog, April 5, 2011

Number of Button Battery-Linked Deaths and Injuries Rising, Says CPSC, Product Liability Law Blog, April 23, 2011

Strangulation, Choking, and Fall Hazards Prompt Recall of Baby Walkers, Clothing, and Books, Product Liability Law Blog, April 17, 2010

Continue reading "Little Tikes Recalls Another 1.7 Million Toy Workshop and Tool Sets Over Choking Hazard" »

According to a study published in the journal Pediatrics, the cartoon SpongeBob SquarePants may cause 4-year-old to develop short-term attention and learning difficulties. The findings come from an observation of 60 children assigned at random to watch "SpongeBob," the carton "Caillou," or draw pictures for nine minutes. Kids were tested for their mental functions after this. The ones that had been assigned to watch "SpongeBob" performed the worst, scoring on average about 12 points less than the other children. The kids in the other group received nearly the same scores. Also, When tested for impulsiveness and self-control, the kids who watched "Sponge Bob" that were shown snacks were only able to wait about 2 ½ minutes before eating them while the other kids were able to wait about four minutes.

Researchers say that considering that cartoons usually run about 22 minutes, if watching SpongeBob is impairing children's attention then watching the entire show could prove "more detrimental." They did, however, say that more evidence is required to verify these concerns.

In response to the study, Nickelodeon spokesperson David Bittler noted that "SpongeBob" is geared toward kids in the 6-11 age group and not 4 year olds. The lead author of the study, University of Virginia psychology professor Angeline Lillard, however, said that kids age 4 were selected because this is the age group when the most development occurs.

Lillard, says that "SpongeBob" isn't the only program that could be cause for parental concern. She reported similar problems with children that watched other cartoons that were fast-paced. She is advising that kids not be allowed to watch these shows whenever they are supposed to learn or pay attention.

It was just four years ago that a study, also published in the Journal of Pediatrics, raised concerns that for every hour of the day that kids in the 8-16 month age group watched educational "Baby Einstein" videos, they ended up with 6-8 less words in their vocabulary than other children the same age. This finding is obviously not what parents who let their kids watch these videos want for them. Also, Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development director Dr. Dimitri Christakis at the University of Washington in Seattle has said that bombarding a child's brain, which is still developing, with too much stimulation can affect his/her ability to learn how to focus correctly.

Child Injuries and Kids' Products
Do you believe that your son or daughter suffered physical, emotional, or mental injuries because a product proved defective or dangerous? Unfortunately, there are many products still out in the market that can hurt kids even though these products are supposed to be made for children.

Our products liability law firm knows how upsetting it can be to find out that you've inadvertently exposed your child to a danger that caused them to get hurt. We help families throughout the US recover child injury compensation from negligent manufacturers, sellers, and distributors.

SpongeBob study: Do fast-paced cartoons impair kids' thinking?, Christian Science Monitor, September 12, 2011

Study: Some cartoons are bad for children's brains, CNN, September 12, 2011

Study faults 'Einstein' videos for infants, Boston.com, August 8, 2007

Related Web Resources:
Pediatrics

Sponge Bob

Baby Einstein

More Blog Posts:
New Crib Safety Standards Go Into Effect Today, Product Liability Law Blog, June 28, 2011

Texas Playground Accident Lawsuit Seeks Damages from McDonald's Chain Owners, Product Liability Law Blog, July 29, 2011

Crib Bumpers: Are They Safe for Babies?, Product Liability Law Blog, April 30, 2011

Playgrounds can be a dangerous place for kids if there is defective equipment on the premises. Recently, the family of Alexis Durant filed a Texas playground accident lawsuit suing the owner of a Houston McDonald's for injuries she sustained while playing at the eatery.

According to Durant's mother, on July 24, the 2-year-old was choking on and soaked in her own blood when she emerged from the tunneled slide in the McDonald's "PlayPlace" area. The toddler, whose lower lip was seriously gashed when it got caught on an exposed end of a bolt as she was going down the slide, is scheduled for plastic surgery.

The family's Texas child injury lawsuit comes one year after another family sued the owners of another McDonald's in the Houston area because of a similar accident. In that Texas playground injury complaint, the family of 6-year-old Dominic Sierra claims that he sustained a gash to his head when he got stuck on an exposed screw while going down a slide on May 25, 2010. The gash was deep enough to reach his skull.

Sierra's family is accusing McDonald's chain owner Janus Unlimited, Inc. of inadequate inspection of the playground. They also claim that when they asked the manager for help, she refused to provide any and would not contact 911.

Meantime, McDonald's has issued a statement maintaining that it is committed to doing everything possible to make sure that its PlayPlaces are safe for kids.

Playground Accidents
With about 200,000 playground injuries and about 15 playground fatalities a year, it is important that premise owners and the manufacturers of playground equipment make sure that there are no safety hazards that could place a child at risk of serious injury or death. Proper maintenance, safe playground design, and using defect-free playground equipment is important. Some playground injuries have been so serious that there are kids who have ended up with serious traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, broken bones, and blindness.

If your child was injured in a playground accident, you may have reason for filing a child injury lawsuit against the property owner, equipment manufacturer, or the party in charge of supervising the kids while they were on the playground.

Playground Injuries At 2 Houston McDonald's Draw Lawsuits, Click2Houston, July 27, 2011

Playground Injuries, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Playground Safety Guide, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons

PlayPlaces & Parties, McDonald's

More Blog Posts:
Playground Accident Death: Girl's Family Wants "X-Wave" Banned, Product Liability Law Blog, August 24, 2010

Back to School Reminder: Playground Accidents Can Lead to Serious Child Injuries, Product Liability Law Blog, October 13, 2009

Playground Accidents Are Leading Cause of Injury to Elementary School Kids, Product Liability Law Blog, October 13, 2009

In a unanimous vote, members of the US Consumer Product Safety Commission have approved a new federal safety rule for children's outerwear. Per the final rule, kids' upper outerwear, sizes 2T through 16 with certain bottom or waist drawstrings and those with hood or neck drawstrings in sizes 2T through 12 possess substantial product hazards that could lead to serious injuries to children. If your child got hurt or died because he or she got entangled in or was strangled while wearing clothing with drawstring, please contact our child products liability law firm today.

The CPSC says it has received 26 reports over kids dying because a clothing drawstring got caught on a school bus door, playground slide, or another object, resulting in dragging incidents, entrapment, and/or strangulation. Serious injury or death can also result if a drawstring was to wrap too tightly around a child's neck. A drawstring that has an object attached to it can also pose a choking hazard if the piece was to come off and the child was to swallow it.

It was in 1996 that the CPSC set up industry guidelines for kids' clothing in regards to drawstrings. The guidelines proved effective in that they've decreased the number of child deaths from hood and neck drawstrings by 75%, while deaths from bottom or waist drawstrings have gone down 100%. In 2006, the CPSC's Office of Compliance said that any kids' upper outerwear with neck or hood drawstrings would be considered a defective product that posed a substantial child injury risk and therefore subject to recall. In 2008, our child injury law firm reported in one of our blog posts that between April 2007 and May 2008 over 18 recalls involving over 19,000 units of clothing with drawstrings was announced.

Recently, Macy's agreed to pay a $750,000 penalty for not reporting drawstrings in kids' outerwear. Federal law requires distributors, manufacturers, and retailers notify the CPSC of a product that is a serious injury or death hazard within 24 hours of discovering the possible defect. The penalty against Macy's resolves allegations that the department store chain did not obey the law and immediately tell the CPSC that it sold children's sweaters, sweatshirts, and jackets with neck drawstrings between 2007 and 2010 and that these posed a child strangulation and death hazard. The defective clothing was sold not just at Macy's stores, but also at Robinsons-May and Bloomingdale's. Some of the clothes were allegedly sold even after they were recalled.

Macy's Agrees to Pay $750,000 Civil Penalty for Failing to Report Drawstrings in Children's Outerwear, CPSC, July 11, 2011

CPSC Issues New Drawstring Safety Rule for Children's Outerwear
Drawstrings at Neck and Waist Present Strangulation Hazard and Other Dangers, CPSC, July 1, 2011

Safety group sets kids' drawstring safety rules, MSNBC/Reuters, July 1, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Read the CPSC's Drawstring Guidelines from 1996 (PDF)

Recalls.Gov

More Blog Posts:
Strangulation, Choking, and Fall Hazards Prompt Recall of Baby Walkers, Clothing, and Books, Product Liability Law Blog, April 17, 2010

Defective Clothing Can Cause Serious Injuries, Product Liability Law Blog, June 18, 2008

Retailers Pay $320,000 Fine For Selling Defective Children's Clothing With Drawstrings, Product Liability Law Blog, May 13, 2008

Continue reading "CPSC Says Certain Kids' Outerwear with Drawstrings Pose Strangulation, Entrapment and Death Hazard to Kids" »

With summer here, our child injury lawyers want to remind parents and guardians to take the precautions necessary to make sure that children are properly supervised when swimming and pools are properly maintained and secured when no one is around to decrease the chances of accidental drownings.

While in the past, our products liability lawyer blog has focused on the dangers of in ground swimming pools and hot tubs, now, we'd like to make you aware of the drowning dangers also posed by inflatable pools. You wouldn't think a pool that above ground and no more than several inches in height as a safety hazard, but according to a new study in the American Academy of Pediatrics, portable backyard pools pose a "significant risk" for drowning to kids under age 5.

Meantime, Consumer Reports is encouraging people to stop buying inflatable pools. The publication reports that in the last decade, at least 209 kids have died in inflatable pools. 94% of these drowning victims were kids under age 5.

Some reasons why portable why backyard pools are a a drowning hazard:

• Most inflatable pools don't have layers of protection that generally accompany a regular swimming pools, such as a pool cover, a safety fence, or a locked pool door with an accompanying alarm to warn when anyone has entered the water unsupervised.


• Many inflatable pools are not drained of water after use.


• The pool's inflatable, pliable sides can make it easy for a child standing outside to slip in.

Drowning Accidents
If someone you love drowned in an inflatable pool, there may be parties who should be held liable. For instance, was the pool located on someone else's property? Was the inflatable pool adequately supervised so that no one could go in undetected? Did the pool manufacture warn that inflatable pools could cause drowning injuries and provide information about how to prevent these accidents from happening?

It takes just inches of water for someone to drown. Drowning is the second leading cause of child deaths.

Our child injury lawyers represent children and their families with drowning accident cases against negligent pool owners and products liability complaints against pool manufacturers.

Portable, inflatable pools -- a significant risk, Consumer Reports, June 20, 2011

PORTABLE POOLS CLAIM OVER 200 CHILDREN'S LIVES, American Academy of Pediatrics, June 20, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Drowning Prevention, SafeKids USA

Kids' Swimming Safety, LiveStrong

CPSC

More Blog Posts:
About 1 Million Pool and Spa Drain Covers Recalled Over Possible Entrapment and Drowning Concerns, Product Liability Law Blog, May 30, 2011

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, 2011

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

Continue reading "Inflatable Pools Pose Significant Drowning Risk to Young Children, Says American Academy of Pediatrics" »