Product Liability Law Blog

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" »

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

A federal court in New Jersey says that retailers can indeed be held strictly liable for selling defective products. The case is DeGennaro v. Rally Manufacturing.

In this New Jersey products liability case, the plaintiff sued the manufacturer and seller of a lead-acid battery that he said exploded while in his hand. The judge found that Pep Boys' management either should have or already knew that the battery was at risk of exploding because it had heat-sealed packaging. The court therefore determined that Pep Boys could not avail of the safe harbor provisions that protect sellers for being liable for products liability.

Under the New Jersey Product Liability Act, there are safe harbor provisions that under certain conditions protect product sellers. To avail of these, the seller must be able to identify the maker from whom damages should be sought and cannot have created the product defect. However, if a seller knew/should have known that the product was defective, then safe harbor cannot be obtained. In DeGennaro, not only was there evidence that Pep Boys knew about the defect but also, despite this knowledge, the store kept selling the battery.

Generally, someone who is injured by a defective product can hold the seller liable. One reason for this is that liability can occur during any point in the chain of distribution and production, which means that not just the manufacturer may be found responsible. It is also uncommon for the product's distributor to be held accountable for products liability resulting in personal injury. Damages can even be obtained if a product was misused if that wrong usage was foreseeable.

A defect can be one involving the product's design (known as a design defect), one that occurs while the product was being manufactured, (manufacturing defect), or after it has been created (likely a marketing defect). The majority of products liability cases are considered strict liability cases. Strict liability lets a plaintiff obtain damages from an injury that was caused by a product without having to prove that the defendant engaged in wrongdoing. In states where strict liability is no longer allowed, a plaintiff may have to prove that the defendant was negligent. This includes showing there was a relationship between the plaintiff and the manufacturer, that the latter owed the former a duty of care, and this duty had been breached, resulting in injury to the plaintiff.

Retailers are liable when they sell defective goods, court reaffirms, The Sacramento Bee, November 16, 2011

DeGennaro v. Rally Manufacturing

More Blog Posts:
Swallowing High-Powered Magnets Can Be Deadly for Kids, Warns CPSC, Product Liability Law Blog, November 10, 2011

Products Liability: Fire Gel Fuel Used in Firepots, Fancy Torches, and Personal Fireplaces Posing a Serious Burn Injury Hazard to Consumers, Product Liability Law Blog, August 3, 2011

Turkey Fryers Can Increase Fire and Injury Risk During Thanksgiving, Product Liability Law Blog, November 22, 2010

Continue reading "Retailers Can Be Held Strictly Liable for Sale of Defective Products, Reaffirms Federal Court" »