Print this articleFord Motor Inc. is voluntarily recalling over 655,000 F-150 and Lincoln Mark LT Pickup Trucks following reports of 11 minor accidents. 2005 and 2006 models with 5.4 liter 3-valve engines are affected by the recall.
The automaker wants to repair a hose that could affect a truck’s braking power if the hose were to become swollen and detach from the intake manifold. The driver might then lose the “assist” function that gives the brakes extra power and would have to step on the pedal more forcefully to stop the truck.
Brake Problems
Brake problems can lead to awful consequences for drivers, passengers, and pedestrians, especially when one of the motor vehicles involved is a large, heavy truck. Injuries sustained in a truck accident can be catastrophic and may result in spinal cord injuries, traumatic brain injuries, or massive internal injuries.
Examples of other brake problems that can cause serious accidents:
• Defective parking brakes
• Problems with the hydraulic lines
• Damaged brake pads
• Brake failure
If you or someone you love was injured in a truck accident or a car accident that occurred because of a defective auto part, you may be able to hold the auto manufacturer, the car dealership, or the auto maintenance shop financially responsible for your injury accident. Calling attention to the product defect may also get the problem fixed and prevent other people from getting hurt.
Over the years, our products liability law firm has successfully represented many injury victims of defective motor vehicles. We take your automotive products liability case very seriously. We even employ an in-house engineering staff that are experts on vehicle safety and design.
Ford recalls more than 655,000 trucks, CNN.com, May 14, 2008
Ford Recalls Trucks for Faulty Break Hose, NewsInferno.com, May 15, 2008
Related Web Resources:
Recall Information, Ford Motor Co.
Kohl’s, Neiman Marcus, True Religion Apparel, Life is Good, Gilden Activewear, Dollar Days International, Cayre Group, and Seena International have agreed to pay $320,000 in penalties to settle allegations made by the Consumer Product Safety Commission that they failed to give immediate notice that they were selling clothing with drawstrings—a combination that is known for causing serious injuries to children.
In 1996, The CPSC had provided retailers and manufacturers with guidelines that suggested that no drawstrings should be placed in the neck or hood area of children’s clothing. It also recommended that drawstrings in pants or at the waist level only be a certain length. In 2006, the CPSC told clothing makers and sellers that any clothing that violated its guidelines would be recalled for defects.
All eight firms have recalled the clothing. They claim they were not aware they had violated the law.
Since April 2007, there have been over 18 recalls involving more than 190,000 units of children’s clothing that came with drawstrings around the waist or neck. There have been no reports of serious injuries associated with the recalls over the past year, but there have been serious injuries and fatalities in the past.
From 1985 to 1999, 48 incidents involving drawstrings on children’s clothing getting tangled on nursery furniture, playground equipment, or other items have been reported. 22 deaths were also reported, including a 14-year-old whose clothing drawstring got caught on a bus handrail. The girl died after she was dragged under the bus.
Drawstring on clothing can also pose a strangulation hazard for children if the strings were to wrap around the child’s neck too tightly or become tangled or stuck on an external object. Drawstrings with small objects attached to them that can easily fall off may pose a choking hazard for children that might swallow the pieces.
Our defective products liability law firm represents the families of children and infants that have been seriously injured or killed because of defective clothing, defective nursery products, dangerous toys, hazardous furniture, and other dangerous or defective consumer goods.
Clothing Retailers Settle With Safety Panel, Washington Post, April 23, 2008
Eight Companies Including Kohl's Must Pay Fine, Associated Content, April 24, 2008
Children's Rain Ponchos with Drawstrings Recalled by Daiso Due to Strangulation Hazard, CPSC.gov, May 12, 2008
Related Web Resource:
On April 24, The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and Waxcessories® Inc. announced the voluntary recall of 830,000 electric simmer pots. There have been over 160 reports of wires and cords coming loose from the pots, and Waxcessories® and the CPSC were concerned of the electric shock and fire hazards that the simmer pots might pose to users.
No injuries have been reported so far. The simmer pots are used for melting scented wax and were made in China. All Waxcessories® electric simmer pot designs and styles are included in the recall.
Across the United States, our product safety law firm represents clients that have been seriously injured because of defective products. One of our electrical product defects lawyers can discuss your products liability case with you during your free consultation.
Electrocution Injuries
Defective products can lead to all kinds of serious injuries, including burn injuries and electrocution injuries. A person can sustain an electric shock injury when he or she comes into direct physical contact with an electrical current or an electrical source.
A person may experience electric shock from a defective hair dryer, heater, household appliance, an electrical work tool, or any other product requiring the use of electricity. Improperly installed power lines in homes and offices and other public premises can also lead to serious—even fatal—electric shock injuries.
The strength of the current and the parts of the body that are affected by electric shock can determine the seriousness of the injury.
Symptoms of electrical shock are not always evident, but serious injuries can include cardiac arrest, burn injuries to the skin, nerve or muscle damage, respiratory failure, hearing problems, seizures, deformity or broken bones at the point of contact on the body, spinal cord injuries, and unconsciousness after direct contact with an electrical source.
Related Web Resources:
Waxcessories® Recalls Electric Simmer Pots Due to Risk of Fire and Shock, CPSC.gov, April 24, 2008
Excessive levels of lead and choking/swallowing hazards associated with small toy parts and magnetic pieces were the reasons cited for the toy recalls in April. The Consumer Product Safety Commission and several toy manufacturers announced the recall of more than 500,000 toys this month, beginning April 3 with StyleMark Inc.'s recall of 144,000 Children’s ‘Main Street Drag’ Sunglasses because of too much lead in the glasses' orange lettering.
Violations of federal lead paint standards was also the reason cited for OKK Trading's recall of 2,000 Interchange Robot Toys,the FUNTASTIC recall of 26,000 Hillbilly Teeth, and Santa’s Toy Corp.’s recall of approximately 9,000 Western Rider Push Toys. Yesterday, Nintendo recalled 71,000 character-themed lapel pins because they contained high levels of lead.
The toys with small parts that are potential choking hazards included 16,400 Imaginarium Multi-Sided Activity Centers and Jungle Activity Centers (sold only in the US at Toys “R” Us stores), 17,000 Dalmatian Press’s Little Builder Children’s Board Book Sets with Toys, and about 300,000 Cuddly Cousins Plush Insect Toys from Dollar Tree Stores Inc.
Henry Gordy International Inc recalled approximately 87,000 Fun ‘N Games Magnetic Dart Boards over worries that kids might swallow the detachable small magnets at the ends of the darts.
All of these toys were made in China.
Last year's massive wave of toy recalls continue to make defective toys a huge issue of concern for parents, as well as federal and state regulators. In March, the U.S. Senate passed legislation for tougher inspections of toys and other kids’ products that are manufactured abroad. The House of Representatives also passed its own version of the legislation in December. While the Bush Administration has expressed some concerns, President Bush has not threatened a veto.
Our toy products liability law firm represents the families of children that have been seriously injured or killed because of a defective or dangerous toy. Our defective products lawyers represent injury clients throughout the United States.
Senate passes foreign-made toy safety bill, MSNBC.com, March 6, 2008
Related Web Resources:
2008 Product Recall Guide, Parents.com
Recalls, Recalls.gov
Hyundai Motor Co. has announced the recall of 393,714 Sonata passenger cars so that it can fix the air bag system located in the front passenger seat. The recall affects 2006, 2007, and 2008 Sonatas.
Hyundai says it has received several reports that the passenger air bag system had shut off when there was a small adult in the seat because the system had misclassified the passenger as a child.
The air bag system is supposed to disable itself whenever it senses a child restraint system or a small child riding in the front passenger seat, but it is not supposed to shut down when there is an adult riding there.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says that this incorrect classification could cause the right front air bag to fail to inflate during a serious accident, which could cause the adult passenger to sustain serious injuries or die.
Air Bags and Auto Accidents
During a car accident, it is important that an air bag inflate at the right time, in the proper way, and at the right speed to avoid serious injuries. An airbag that fails to deploy or deploys incorrectly during a serious auto crash can cause catastrophic injuries. A person that is not properly restrained may even die after being struck by an inflating air bag.
Air Bag Malfunctions Include:
• Failure to deploy
• Deploying at the wrong time
• Chemical burns from gas escaping the air bag
• Failure to replace a deployed air bag
Injuries that have been caused by air bags include:
• Neck injuries
• Head injuries, including decapitation
• Facial injuries
• Broken bones
• Eye injuries, including blindness
• Death
If you or someone you love suffered serious injuries or died because an air bag failed to deploy or deployed incorrectly, the victim or his or her family may be entitled to recover damages from the auto manufacturer or another liable party. One of our air bag injury lawyers can explore your legal options during your free consultation.
Hyundai Sonatas Recalled for Air Bag Failure, Consumer Affairs, April 16, 2008
What You Need to Know About Air Bags, NHTSA
Related Web Resources:
Air Bag Safety, Insurance Information Institute
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says that occupant protection provided by midsized cars during side impact collisions is getting better, but passenger protection during rear-end collisions continues to be poor or marginal. The Institute announced its findings after testing a number of midsized cars, including the Chevrolet Malibu, the Nissan Altima, the Dodge Avenger, the Kia Optima, the Infiniti G35, the Mitsubishi Gallant, and the Saturn Aura.
All of the cars earned good ratings for solid passenger protection during frontal accidents. Except for the KIA Optima, they also earned high ratings for side crash protection. The presence of side air bags in all of the cars was one of the main reasons cited for the improved test results—compared to to midsized cars that were tested in 2004.
The only car to test well for rear crashworthiness was the Kia Optima, whose seat/head restraints received top ratings.
Rear-End Collision Safety
If a vehicle moves forward when struck during a rear end collision, its seats can push the occupants’ bodies forward. If a passenger’s head doesn’t have any support, it can fall behind as the torso moves forward and may cause neck injuries. Installing the proper head restraints allows the head and torso to move forward together and minimizes neck injuries, including whiplash.
Neck injuries are the most common injury that occurs during auto accidents. A neck injury can lead to whiplash, nerve damage, disc damage, torn ligaments, headaches, tingling sensation in the arms, and severe pain.
Rear-end collisions, like all other car accidents, can also lead to more catastrophic injuries, including traumatic brain injuries, a broken neck, burn injuries, spinal cord injuries, and wrongful death.
In 2004, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced a new safety standard for head restraints, requiring them to be placed higher and closer to the head. The head restraints must also be adjustable.
If you or someone you love was seriously injured in a car accident because the automobile lacked the proper safety measures or the head restraint, a front or side airbag, or another device or auto part was defective, contact our auto products liability law firm right away to discuss your case. You may be entitled to personal injury compensation.
New crash tests of midsize cars: protection in side impacts improves, but most cars tested still afford marginal or poor protection in rear crashes, IIHS.org, April 10, 2008
NHTSA Announces Upgraded Rule for Head Restraints in Vehicles, NHTSA, December 7, 2004
Related Web Resources:
New Crash Tests of Midsize Cars, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (PDF)
Whiplash Neck Injuries, Head Rests, Head Restraints
The SUV rollover lawsuit filed against Mitsubishi Motors by the family of TLC Singer Lisa “Left Eye” Lopes will go forward, says the Georgia Court of Appeals. The auto manufacturing giant had tried to have the wrongful death lawsuit dismissed because the company is located abroad and the accident occurred in Honduras.
Lopes died while on vacation in April 2002 in a rollover collision outside the town of La Ceiba. Lopes, 30, was driving the Mitsubishi SUV that rolled over.
Representing the pop star’s family in the case is Attorney Stuart Ollanik, a senior partner at the auto products liability law firm of Gilbert, Ollanik & Komyatte,PC. Mr. Ollanik says that the sport utility vehicle that Lopes was operating was not as resistant to rollovers as it could and should have been—especially because many SUVs that are now being made are “a little lower, just a little bit wider, and with electronic stability." Electronic stability systems can automatically adjust the steering and braking of a motor vehicle so that it doesn’t tip over.
Mr. Ollanik and Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, PC are long-term advocates of improving SUVs. Testing conducted by the law firm show that just lowering the center of gravity of a sport utility vehicle and widening the wheel base can prevent an SUV from rolling over. Many engineers and safety experts agree.
Mitsubishi has denied any wrongdoing related to Lopes’s rollover death.
Our auto products liability law firm is nationally recognized for helping injured clients and their families across the United States recover injury and wrongful death compensation from some of the largest auto manufacturers in the country and the world.
To watch Stuart Ollanik's recent interview with Fox Colorado News please visit: SUV Lawsuit Aimed At Improving Safety, MyFoxColorado.com, March 9, 2008
TLC's Lisa 'Left Eye' Lopes dies in wreck, CNN.com, April 26, 2002
Related Web Resources:
A Few Facts About SUVs and Safety, PBS.org
American Airlines announced this week that it was canceling over 2,000 flights to conduct safety inspections on a number of jets. The cancellations affected flights taking off on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, and more cancellations may be announced. The airline company also canceled several hundred flights last month for more inspections.
Inspectors want to make sure that the airline company is in compliance of a federal order providing instruction on the way that the wires in the wheels of MD-80 jets should be bundled. Many of the jets have reportedly passed inspection.
American Airlines is not the first airline in recent weeks to ground its flights over safety concerns. Alaska Airlines, Southwest Airlines, Delta Airlines, Midwest Airlines, and United Airlines have also cancelled flights so that their planes could undergo inspection.
Federal law makers are accusing the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of getting too close to the airline industry that it isn’t doing a proper job of protecting passenger safety. Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Nicholas Sabatini disputes this criticism, saying that the FAA has achieved 99 percent safety compliance.
Last month, the FAA fined Southwest with a $10.2 million civil penalty for missing safety inspections. The airline company turned itself in upon discovering the discrepancy, but continued to use the planes for passenger flights. Southwest’s failure to check its planes’ fuselages for cracks is one of the reasons that the FAA is now doing an audit of all airlines’ maintenance records.
The FAA will use its 10 airworthiness directives when inspecting the other airlines.
Aviation Accidents
Accidents involving airline carriers, private jets, helicopters, charter planes, and other kinds of planes often lead to catastrophic injuries—if, that is, there are any survivors. It is important that the airplanes are properly maintained at all times. A faulty engine that malfunctions from thousands of feet above the ground can lead to deadly consequences for the pilot, a plane’s passengers, and people on the ground.
Our product safety lawyers are dedicated to helping the victims of serious injury accidents that are caused by defective or malfunctioning products recover compensation from the negligent parties.
If you or someone you love was seriously injured in a plane crash, or someone you love died in an aviation accident that happened because the aircraft that they were riding in malfunctioned, contact our defective products law firm and ask for your free consultation.
American Airlines cancels 900 more flights, CNN.com, April 9, 2008
FAA orders safety checks for all airlines, Bizjournals.com, March 19, 2008
Related Web Resources:
This week, Washington State Governor Christine Gregoire signed into law the Children’s Safe Products Act, which imposes the toughest restrictions yet for lead standards for toys among the U.S. states. The law decreases the legally allowed limit for lead in toys from 90 parts per million to 40 parts per million, which is the limit that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends. The law goes into effect beginning July 1, 2009.
The current federal limit is 600 parts per million, and many state lawmakers have expressed dismay that the federal government isn’t acting faster to change its lead safety standards.
The lead-related recalls continue. In March, toy recalls involving high levels of lead paint included:
• 130 ring toss games by Educational Insights
• 13,000 Hobby Lobby Stores Camouflage Eggs and Spinning Egg Top Toys
• 5,000 S.U. Wholesale X Force Commander Toy Airplanes and Super Famous Toy Cars and Motorcycles
On March 17, representatives for giant toy manufacturers Mattel and Hasbro met with Governor Gregoire and asked her to reconsider signing the bill into law. Mattel says that half of its Fisher-Price toy line will have to be barred from the state of Washington because the level of lead in its toys exceeds the state’s new limit. A few smaller manufacturers, such as Toysmith and Kaethe Kruse Puppen GmbH, say they will stop shipping toys to Washington altogether.
Michigan and Illinois have also approved new lead safety standard laws, while Maryland, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Maine, and Vermont are among several other states that are reevaluating their safety regulations so they can regulate mercury, lead, phthalates, and other toxins, such as Arsenic, Selenium, and Barium, in toys. California will begin its ban on phthalates next year.
The Minnesota Safety Council says that there were 202,300 toy-related injuries in 2005. One child getting hurt or killed by a toy is one child too many.
Our products liability law firm represents clients throughout the United States whose children were seriously injured or killed because of a defective toy or another dangerous product.
One of our consumer products safety lawyers would be happy to discuss your case with you.
Washington: Restrictions on Chemicals in Toys, New York Times, April 2, 2008
States Alter Rules of Game On Safety for Toy Makers, The Wall Street Journal, March 25, 2008
Recalled Toys and Children's Products, US PIRG
Toy Injury, Minnesota Safety Council
Related Web Resource:
The Children's Safe Product Act of 2008, Washington Toxic Coalition
Abigail Taylor, the six-year-old girl who was seriously injured last year when here intestines were partially sucked out by a swimming pool drain in Minnesota, has died.
The catastrophic accident took place on June 29 while Abigail was sitting in a wading pool at the Minneapolis Golf Club. Abigail had to undergo liver, small bowel, and pancreas transplants following the incident.
Abigail's parents have fought for tougher laws that would prevent similar accidents from happening. In December, Congress approved The Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act, which prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of drain covers that fail to meet anti-entrapment safety laws.
The bill is named after former Secretary of State James Baker’s granddaughter, who drowned in 2002 when she became trapped in a drain and couldn’t be pulled out because the suction was too strong.
Last November, Abigail’s parents filed a personal injury lawsuit against the Minneapolis Golf Club and Sta-Rite, the company that made the pool’s pump and drain. The couple is accusing the manufacturer of knowing that its products could cause evisceration but did not do anything to remove this danger.
In 2005, a U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission report stated that since 1990, at least 130 people have gotten stuck in the suctions of pool and spa drains, resulting in numerous fatalities and many more injury cases. Other reports indicate that from 1985 to 2004 at least 33 children 14 years of age and under have died because of spa/pool entrapment, with almost 100 other kids sustaining serious injuries.
A person can become entrapped in a pool or spa drain when his or her hair, swimsuit, or another body part gets caught. Sometimes, the suction can be so strong that it becomes impossible to pull the trapped person out of the water.
Had she lived through adulthood, Abigail 's family says that her medical and special living costs would have cost about $30 million.
Our consumer products safety law firm represents clients in serious injury cases that were caused by a defective or dangerous product. Our products liability lawyers work with clients nationwide, and we handle defective products cases involving serious personal injury and wrongful deaths.
Girl Whose Intestines Were Partially Sucked Out by Swimming Pool Drain Dies, AP, March 21, 2008
Family of Girl Maimed by Pool Drain Sues, ABC News, November 16, 2007
Baker family motivated by the death of 7-year-old Virginia Graeme Baker, USA SafeKids.org, May 2, 2006
Related Web Resources:
Guidelines for Entrapment Hazards: Making Pools and Spas Safer, US Consumer Product Safety Commission, March 2005 (PDF)
In the latest major toy recall, Mega Brands and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled about 2.4 million toys with small magnets because of concerns that the magnet could fall off and seriously injure children if they swallowed or inhaled the small pieces.
Included in the voluntary MEGA Brands recall are 1.3 million MagnaMan Magnetic Toy Figures because the toys have small magnets that can come off. The magnets attach the body parts of each figure together.
While no injuries have been reported so far, the toymaker and the CPSC have reported 25 incidents of the magnet pieces falling off. Toy model numbers affected by the recall are available on the CPSC Web site.
MEGA Brands is also recalling 1.1 million Magtastik and Magnetix Jr. Pre-school Magnetic Toys. There have so far been 19 reported incidents of small magnet pieces falling off the toys.
One 18-month child reportedly put a magnet in his mouth but did not swallow it. A 3-year-old boy needed medical care to remove the magnet that got stuck in his nose.
This is not the first recall for MEGA Brands. In March 2006, MEGA Brands recalled 3.8 million magnetic building sets after four children were seriously injured and another child died because all of them had swallowed small magnet pieces.
In its second magnet toy-related recall since January, Battat Inc. recalled approximately 7,000 more toys with magnets. There have been 16 reports of magnets falling off the building pieces of Battat Magnabild Magnetic Building Toys or Sets.
Magnets can be very dangerous if swallowed or ingested—especially if more than one magnet enters the human body. Intestinal perforations or blocks can occur when two or more magnets come together and can result in serious injuries or deaths.
Our products liability lawyers handle many toy injury cases for children and their families. We are committed to helping you obtain compensation for the harm and trauma that your son or daughter has suffered at the hands of a dangerous or defective toy.
2.4M toys recalled because tiny magnets can fall out, USA Today, March 15, 2008
Battat Recalls Additional Magnetic Construction Sets; Ingested Magnets Pose Aspiration and Intestinal Hazards, CPSC.gov, March 13, 2008
Related Web Resources:
Swallowed Magnets Attract Trouble in Boy's Intestines, ABC News, February 5, 2008
Toy Magnets Attract Sales, and Suits, New York Times, July 15, 2008
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety released a report this week that confirms what many products liability attorneys and injury victims have said about sport utility vehicles all along: If they were made with better roofs, there would be less serious injuries and deaths when rollovers do occur.
Automakers have disputed this claim for years and safety regulators, such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, have been slow to condemn the quality of SUV roofs without more definitive evidence.
The IIHS report, however, is definite about its conclusion that over 200 SUV rollover deaths could have been avoided in 2006 if these SUVs were made with roofs as strong as the best one the that the IIHS tested. “Strengthening a vehicle’s roof,” according to IIHS President Adrian Lund, “reduces injury risk.. a lot.”
The institute came to this conclusion after compiling data from 12 U.S. States and comparing the injury and death rates for four-door SUVs. The SUVs tested were sold from the mid-1990’s through 2004 and did not include models with side-curtain air bags or stability control.
Not everyone is convinced by the IIHS’s finding that improving vehicle roof strength is the answer. The NHTSA says that people not wearing seatbelts continues to be a major cause of rollover deaths. The NHTSA hasn’t revised its roof strength standard since 1971. It is working on a revised standard and estimates that this update, once implemented, will help save 13 to 44 lives a year.
Nissan, the automaker whose vehicle ranked as the “best roof” tested, says other factors, such as the seriousness of the crash, also affected the chances of serious injuries or deaths.
Roof Crushes
A roof that crushes during a motor vehicle accident increases the chances of passenger injury or death. Spinal cord injuries, head injures, neck injuries, traumatic brain injuries, and death are more likely to occur when a roof crushes into passengers’ bodies. Roof crushes are more likely to happen during a rollover. Because of the height and shape of SUV’s, these vehicles have a higher chance than cars of becoming involved in a rollover accident.
Our auto crash law firm represents clients injured in SUV rollover crashes and other kinds of serious injury accidents throughout the United States. We understand the nature of SUV rollover crashes and have gone up against some of the largest auto manufacturers in the world to sue for damages for our clients.
Crash-test report backs stronger roofs on SUVs, USA Today, March 12, 2008
Roof Strength and Injury Risk in Rollover Crashes, IIHS.org (PDF)
Related Web Resources:
Rollover Status Report, IIHS.org, (PDF)
Safety Briefing on Roof Crush, Citizen.org
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is reporting an increase in nursery-related injuries and deaths affecting kids younger than 5. According to the CPSC’s annual report, there were 66,400 injuries involving nursery products that required emergency room attention in 2006. In 2005, there were 59,800 injuries.
High on the list of products involving serious injury accidents were play yard and cribs. 12,400 injuries and 43 deaths involving these products occur annually.
In 2007, 1.7 million play yards and cribs were recalled following reports of three deaths and a number of entrapment incidents. Graco and Simplicity products made up approximately 1 million of the products recalled.
Just last week, the CPSC and Munire Furniture Inc. recalled 24,000 cribs, including Majestic Curved Top and Flat Top Cribs, Essex Cribs, Brighton/Sussex Cribs and Captiva Cribs, because they did not meet federal safety standards. The failure of the four support brackets on the mattress to prevent the spring from going down to its minimum height can allow children to fall over the railing. The cribs were manufactured in Indonesia.
Suffocation, and entrapment caused by defective parts and too much bedding are among the leading causes of crib injures and deaths. Gas poisoning because of substances found in the mattresses can also lead to crib deaths. Fall injuries are also a common concern.
In its report, the CPSC’ nursery products-related injury list also included the following products:
• Infant Carriers
• Car Seats
• Mattresses
• Changing Tables
• High Chairs
• Strollers
• Carriages
• Baby Walkers
• Exercisers
• Jumpers
• Baby Gates and Barriers
• Baby Bouncer Seats
• Portable Swings
• Baby Baths
• Bathinettes
• Bath Seats
• Cradles
• Bassinets
Our products liability attorneys represent families throughout the United States whose children have been injured or killed by a defective toy or nursery products. We would be happy to discuss your case during a free consultation.
CPSC report on nursery-related deaths highlights crib and play yard dangers, ConsumerReports.org, February 28, 2008
Nursery Product-Related Injuries and Deaths Among Children Under Age Five, CPSC.gov (PDF)
Related Web Resources:
The Toy Industry Association recently announced a new "testing and safety verification system" intended to restore the confidence of U.S. consumers in the safety of the toys that they buy. The new system follows in the wake of last year's mass recalls of some 25 million toys due to hazard and health concerns.
The three key features of this "testing and safety verification system" asks that toy manufacturers:
- Pay more attention to safety when designing toys.
- Make sure that safety concerns are addressed when manufacturing toys.
- Conduct more tests before and after a toy enters the marketplace.
It is important to note, however, that these standards are voluntary, not mandatory. And even new legislation being considered by U.S. lawmakers have their limits.
A bill passed in the House of Representatives last December still fails to make certain tests mandatory, including tests to check for lead content, magnet pieces, or small choking hazard pieces in toys.
The two largest recalls last year involved 4.2 million Aqua Dots beading sets with a coma-inducing chemical that can be swallowed and 7.3 million Polly Pocket dolls with small magnet parts.
It is important to note that the U.S. government and the Consumer Product Safety Commission cannot regulate manufacturers outside the U.S.—over 80% of toys purchased here are made in China. Most of the 25 million toys recalled last year were made in China.
And the recalls keep coming. On Friday, Family Dollar recalled 250,000 Magnetic Dart Boards, because the small magnets at the ends of the darts can come off and are easily swallowed by children.
On February 19, Dumar International USA recalled 64,000 Cinderella 12-Volt Electric Ride-On Vehicles because a short circuit in the battery compartment proved to be a possible fire hazard. Both toys were made in China.
Our consumer product safety law firm would like to talk to you if your child was injured or killed because of a dangerous or hazardous toy. Our products liability attorneys have helped many injured parties and their families recover compensation from liable manufacturers.
Toy safety regulations need steep penalties, Los Angeles Times, February 24, 2008
Related Web Resources:
Toy Safety, U.S.PIRG
Frances Barras, a Texas woman, is suing DuPont , Guard-Line, Union Carbide, Anchor Packing Co., Ingersoll-Rand, Guard-Line, Owens-Illinois, and a few other industrial companies for allegedly exposing her to asbestos because she would inhale fibers from her husband’s clothing when doing his laundry.
Barras’s husband Louis worked as a refinery worker at the DuPont facility in Beaumont. Barras says the asbestos dust and fibers coming from his work clothes, hair, and body caused her to become ill. As part of her duties, she would wash his work clothes, replace washing machine lint filters, clean the laundry area, and ride in the car that her husband would take to work.
Barras says that the asbestos came from the products sold by the defendants, who were negligent in manufacturing and distributing goods with asbestos. In her lawsuit, filed in Jefferson County District Court in Texas earlier this month, Barras says that DuPont should have realized that employees exposed to asbestos could unwittingly spread the fibers to others, including family members.
Louis and the couple’s children are also plaintiffs in the case. They say that DuPont was negligent in causing Frances’s asbestos exposure because of its:
• Failure to execute precautions to ensure that asbestos fibers did not leave the work area.
• Failure to properly warn of the health risks that come with asbestos exposure.
• Failure to provide a place where employees’ clothes could be laundered.
• Failure to educate workers about wearing protective gear.
The lawsuit alleges that all of the defendants allowed each other to behave negligently and Frances was harmed as a result. The Barras family is suing the defendants for $30 million.
DuPont and other industrial companies have used asbestos as a fire retardant and for insulation for years. Asbestos is made up of minerals that have tiny fibers, which can be dangerous—even fatal—if inhaled. It is believed that many companies were aware of the health risks associated with asbestos but continued to expose workers to the substance. Many companies continue to use asbestos.
Diseases associated with asbestos exposure include:
• Lung Cancer
• Pleural disease
• Asbestosis
• Mesothelioma
DuPont has been named as a defendant in numerous lawsuits alleging that the company has exposed workers, consumers, and others to hazardous substances.
Our consumer safety law firm has successfully filed lawsuits against some of the largest corporate giants in the U.S. for the harm that their negligence has caused our clients. One of our asbestos lawsuit lawyers can discuss your case with you during a free consultation.
Nederland housewife files $30M suit against DuPont, alleges asbestos exposure from husband's laundry, Southeast Texas Record, February 19, 2008
Related Web Resources:
What is Asbestos?, ATSDR.cdc.gov
Illnesses Caused by Asbestos Exposure, USAAction.org