Recently in defective products Category

Children's Pajamas Recalled Over Burn Fears

When we purchase clothes for young children, we normally think about how they will fit and whether they will look good. We normally do not worry about whether they present an unreasonable risk of burn injuries due to a defective design.

We don't concern ourselves about this because we assume manufacturers of children's clothing have followed the law and all recommended safety guidelines and do everything in their power to avoid safety risks. We also assume if a company learns of a problem, it will immediately issue a voluntary safety recall and notify the public.

707631_fire_truck.jpgAccording to a recent news article from WFLA News, one manufacturer of children's pajamas is recalling its products as a result of a violation of the federal flammability regulation. Officials have reported the pajamas in question pose a significant safety risk due to burn injuries.

In response to this alleged violation of federal flammability standards, the company says they are recalling around 8,000 units affected by this issue. The company also urges parents to have their children stop wearing the potentially hazardous pajamas immediately. The pajamas involved in the recall were one-piece and two-piece sets made of 100 percent polyester. Fortunately, no injuries have been reported as result of the burn hazard, but these allegedly defective children's pajamas were sold from 2012 to 2015.

Continue reading "Children's Pajamas Recalled Over Burn Fears " »

Stuhlmacher v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.: Defective Products Cases

In Stuhlmacher v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., plaintiff was injured in November of 2008 while building a cabin for his parents. The cabin was in Sullivan, Indiana. A few days before his accident, plaintiff purchased a four-legged stepladder from a big box hardware retailer, so he could work on the roof.

stair-folding-1185444-m.jpgDuring his first time using the ladder, it fell from the side of the house. He grabbed onto the rafters and then fell to the ground on the right front rail of the ladder. His groin made contact with the ladder when he fell. He suffered a shoulder injury, but his most serious personal injury was to his penis. His doctor diagnosed plaintiff with Peyronie's disease.

Peyronie's disease is painful condition that causes one's penis to become bent, which among other things prevented plaintiff from having sexual intercourse with his wife.
As our Boston personal injury attorneys can explain, when a victim of a personal injury is no longer able to have a normal intimate relationship with his or her spouse, the law provides a remedy known as loss of consortium damages, which can be awarded to the victim's spouse.

Continue reading "Stuhlmacher v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.: Defective Products Cases " »

Golfer Greg Norman Injured in Chainsaw Accident

According to recent news report from CNN, professional golfer Greg Norman was hospitalized after being injured in a chainsaw accident. Norman had posted pictures of himself with the chainsaw on the social media platform Instagram with a caption that it was time trim the sea grapes and that you should never pay someone to do a job you can do yourself.

1314902_medical_doctor.jpgLater that same day, Norman posted another photograph showing himself in a hospital with an air cast on his arm. In this photograph he told viewers that he was lucky to be alive, to always respect chainsaws, and the he still had the use of his left hand.

It has been reported that he injured himself while using the chainsaw and required surgery to repair the resulting nerve damage. He is expected to make a full recovery.

While it appears that Norman will be okay when his arm heals, our injury attorneys in Boston know accidents involving power tools and heavy machinery often end with more tragic results.

While there are many occasions where the injury was truly an accident for which nobody was at fault, there are also times when the injury is the result of a defectively designed tool, or the result of the manufacturer failing to adequately warn users of dangers the company knew or should have known about.

Continue reading "Golfer Greg Norman Injured in Chainsaw Accident " »

Vesely v. Armslist LLC: Wrongful Death Actions and Sales of Guns Over the Web

Our Boston wrongful death lawyers understand that in some cases, proving a relationship between a plaintiff and third party may require significant litigation.

UF_charges_DC.jpgVesely v. Armslist LLC, a case heard in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, involved a woman killed by a man she met on an internet dating website. The man attempted to pursue a romantic relationship with the decedent, but she declined his advances.

After being rejected by the victim, the man purchased a .40 caliber handgun from a man in Seattle via an online classifieds page created to facilitate the purchase and sale of weapons. The website featured several disclaimers that stated owners of the site are in no way involved in any transactions between parties and that they in no way guarantee the legality of any transaction conducted via the website.

According to the website, any person who engages in a transaction is responsible for following all state and federal laws pertaining to the sale of guns and ammunition, and if a party has any questions, they should contact the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) directly.

Continue reading "Vesely v. Armslist LLC: Wrongful Death Actions and Sales of Guns Over the Web " »

Lee v. Smith & Wesson Corporation: Admissibility of Expert Testimony in a Personal Injury Case

Our Boston personal injury lawyers know rules of evidence can lead to complex litigation.

pistol-443691-m.jpgIn Lee v. Smith & Wesson Corporation, the plaintiff was injured while shooting target practice with his revolver manufactured by the defendant. The plaintiff fired two shots without incident and, on the third shot, was severely injured when the gun hit him in the eye.

According to the plaintiff's testimony, the cylinder that holds the bullets swung open after the shot was fired due a manufacturing defect and hit him in the safety glasses. The safety glasses broke, causing significant trauma and loss of vision to his right eye.

Continue reading "Lee v. Smith & Wesson Corporation: Admissibility of Expert Testimony in a Personal Injury Case " »

GM Misled Families on Fatal Ignition Defect

In May 2009, engineers at GM learned that black box evidence obtained from Chevrolet Cobalts confirmed that hundreds of thousands of cars had fatal defects. The evidence showed that if the vehicle was bumped or weighed down, the engine's power could shut down and deactivate airbags. Despite this knowledge, along with additional documents and studies that confirmed the report, GM told families of accident victims that it did not have enough evidence to confirm the defect. After years of denial, GM finally recalled 1.6 million Cobalts and other vehicles that could also be affected by the defect.

When a defective or dangerous product causes harm to a consumer, the company must be held liable. While many corporations may fight allegations on other grounds, this is a case of egregious deceit in an attempt to deny victims their rightful recovery. Failure to admit the fatal defects has also put hundreds of thousands of additional motorists and their passengers in danger. Our Boston personal injury attorneys are dedicated to protecting the rights of accident victims.

Continue reading "GM Misled Families on Fatal Ignition Defect " »

High-End Bicycle Recalls Highlight Risks of Defective Products in Cycling

When looking for a new bicycle, most of us want one that fits our needs. Whether that's our color preference, the size or the way it rides, we all want a bike that will work for us. But how many of us think about safety when purchasing a new bike? We kind of just assume that it's made properly and default free upon purchase.

But often we're wrong.
Officials with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) have recalled a number of bikes in recent weeks. These recalls have been because of faulty brakes, fall hazards and serious injury risks.

Our Boston defective products attorneys understand that consumers were deluged with 2,363 recalls last year, or about 6.5 recalls each day, covering consumer products, pharmaceuticals, medical devices and food, according to data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Department of Agriculture and the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Many of these recalls involve expense bikes aimed at serious riders.

Continue reading "High-End Bicycle Recalls Highlight Risks of Defective Products in Cycling " »

Toyota Moves Forward in Sudden Acceleration Settlements

In previous posts we have discussed the injuries and deaths involving Toyota's "sudden acceleration" accidents. While Toyota once objected to the notion that the vehicles automatically accelerated and caused accidents, the company has now agreed to move forward in an intensive settlement process on behalf of accident victims and their families. As with most large-scale product liability and defective products cases, the facts can be complicated and involve numerous victims. In this case, the company is likely moving forward to prevent additional public exposure and to prevent an extended trial period for these cases.


Any car accident case may involve a defective part or product. If you or someone you love was involved in an accident, you should consult an experienced advocate who can investigate your case and uncover the cause of the injuries or fatalities. Our Boston personal injury attorneys are experienced with complex car accident and products liability claims and can effectively protect your rights and interests. We are also dedicated to staying abreast of cases involving multiple injuries and accidents caused by defective products.

Continue reading "Toyota Moves Forward in Sudden Acceleration Settlements " »

Defective Airbags Could Put You At Risk- Has Your Car Been Recalled?

Airbags are one of the most important safety features in your vehicle as the airbag can cushion the blow and reduce the force of impact you feel in an auto accident. When airbags don't work, the risk of serious injury significantly increases. A failure to deploy isn't even the biggest risk, as an airbag that deploys suddenly when it isn't supposed to could actually cause an accident that leads to serious injury or death. car-crash-1432754-m.jpg

Our Boston defective products lawyers know that auto manufacturers are responsible for ensuring the safety of all vehicles, including safety features like the airbag. Unfortunately, things can still go wrong. It is important for every driver to keep up-to-date on news of car recalls and to respond promptly if they learn that their car is being recalled because of an airbag problem or other defect. Recently, for example, as many as 803,000 owners of Toyota crossover vehicles and sedans got news that their vehicle is now being subject to a recall.

Continue reading "Defective Airbags Could Put You At Risk- Has Your Car Been Recalled? " »

Is Stryker Letting Down Its Customers When It Comes to Safety?

The medical device manufacturer, Stryker, describes itself as "one of the world's leading medical technology companies" that is "dedicated to helping healthcare professionals perform their jobs more efficiently while enhancing patient care." With such a positive description of their dedication to enhancing patient care, it would be reasonable for patients to expect that the company takes safety seriously and that the company doesn't release products on the market that are dangerous. books-and-pages-913588-m.jpg

In fact, our Boston defective hip implant lawyers know that patients have the right to expect that every medical device that is manufactured and sold is tested and is safe. Product liability laws in the United States are designed to ensure that manufacturers take the blame for any failure in their devices specifically because they are in the best position to test them and ensure they won't hurt patients. As such, if a medical device turns out to be defective and causes unexpected harm to patients, the individuals who are hurt don't even have to prove negligence to file a lawsuit and recover compensation.

Despite the laws protecting patients, however, news of yet another recalled Stryker product may raise concern among patients that the company perhaps has some deficiencies in its product testing systems that could be putting customers at risk.

Continue reading "Is Stryker Letting Down Its Customers When It Comes to Safety? " »

Failure to Warn in Transvaginal Mesh Cases

Recently, our Boston transvaginal mesh lawyers reported that two transvaginal mesh claims had been resolved, one in a settlement and one in which the jury awarded a plaintiff $2 million in compensation. warning-icon-glossy-6-1023556-m.jpg

In awarding the monetary compensation to the plaintiff, the jury indicated that the transvaginal mesh product was defective and that the manufacturer, C.R. Bard Inc. was liable for failure to warn. Failure to warn is a specific legal term that will come up again in other transvaginal mesh claims and that is also important in many other cases brought against companies who release dangerous products, unsafe drugs or defective medical devices.

Continue reading "Failure to Warn in Transvaginal Mesh Cases " »

Judge Releases New Case Management Order in Stryker Hip Implant Litigation

Throughout the United States, there are hundreds of lawsuits pending against Stryker based on its Stryker Rejuvenate and Stryker ABG II hip implant products. The lawsuits have been brought by individuals who had Stryker hip implants used in procedures prior to the July 2012 recall of these defective medical devices. balance-875413-m.jpg

Our Boston defective hip implant lawyers know that the outcome of pending cases are important because they can shape future litigation. While each of the different lawsuits will be resolved on their own merits if the cases proceed, verdicts or decisions that favor the plaintiff could make the company more likely to offer generous settlements to injured victims who have lawsuits pending.

Because the current litigation can have an impact on all plaintiffs, it is important to keep up-to-date with what is going on with Stryker cases, especially multi-district and multi-county proceedings. Recently, in one such proceeding in New Jersey, the court issued a new case management order.

Continue reading "Judge Releases New Case Management Order in Stryker Hip Implant Litigation " »

TransVaginal Mesh Lawsuits Spike as Statute of Limitation Nears

Those who have been negatively affected by the insertion of vaginal mesh to treat urinary incontinence and pelvic discomfort may have only a short time left to file a claim for compensation.
Our transvaginal mesh attorneys understand that victims in these cases may have a two-year window from the time they learned of widespread problems in which to file suit. The U.S. Food & Drug Administration had issued a warning on July 13, 2011, indicating that the mesh was often ineffective, but exposed patients to greater health risks and that surgery complications were widespread.

An earlier warning from the U.S. Food & Drug Administration in 2008 had downplayed the issues patients suffered and indicated that problems with the mesh material were rare. The agency may have been reluctant because the product has been so widely used since the 1990s, and had been touted as an advancement in medical treatment.

Today, we know that is clearly not the case. The FDA discovered that in about 1 out of every 10 women who had the transvaginal mesh inserted for purposes of pelvic repair had some degree of erosion within just one year of the implant. Other common complications noted from the devices were intense pain, bleeding, infection, organ perforation, urinary problems and painful sexual intercourse. Additionally, some patients reported experiencing vaginal scarring and shrinking, neuro-muscular problems and recurrent prolapse. Many of these woman also suffered deep emotional effects as well.

Several of the medical device companies targeted by this litigation are based in Boston, including Boston Scientific Corp. Since that 2011 warning from the FDA, Boston Scientific has been named as a defendant in some 6,300 lawsuits pertaining to transvaginal mesh.

More than half of those cases were filed this year. Some 1,600 of those were filed just in May and June of this year.

In all, it's believed about 16,000 lawsuits have been filed on behalf of transvaginal mesh patients and their surviving family members. That's quite a bit more than anyone initially expected, though it just goes to show how widespread the troubles have been.

Boston Scientific has held firm in its stance that transvaginal mesh products continue to be an "important treatment option" for women troubled by pelvic organ prolapse.

Many of the cases filed in federal court have been lumped into a multidistrict litigation action that is being handled in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia. The first of those cases is expected to proceed to trial by the end of this year. The next is on the docket for next spring.

These lawsuits allege that manufacturers failed in their duty to provide an adequate warning regarding the risks associated with these medical products.

Attorneys across the country will be closely watching how these cases unfold. They have been coined "bellweather cases," in that they will give both plaintiffs and defendants a clearer sense of how juries are going to weigh these issues.

Continue reading "TransVaginal Mesh Lawsuits Spike as Statute of Limitation Nears " »

Johnson & Johnson Tries to Block Experts in DePuy Hip Implant Cases

DePuy hip implant devices are one of several brands of metal-on-metal hip implants that have proved to be dangerous to patients. DePuy Orthopaedics, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, is currently defending itself against a number of lawsuits from patients harmed by their defective hip replacement and hip implant products. Recently, Harris Martin reported that the company asked the court in one of those cases to prevent two experts from testifying. 1207444_courtroom_1.jpg

Our Boston DePuy injury attorneys know that DePuy lost a past case when an injured plaintiff was awarded $8.3 million in damages. The company is likely trying to prevent future large verdicts. The motion to the court to keep these two experts from testifying in the case is just another attempt to escape liability for the defective metal-on-metal devices.

DePuy Orthopaedics Seeks to Block Expert Testimony

The case against DePuy Orthopaedics is a product liability case and the plaintiffs have the burden of showing that the metal-on-metal hip implant products were dangerous and failed to live up to the promises made by the manufacturer. The plaintiffs do not need to demonstrate that DePuy Orthopaedics was negligent in not producing a safer product since strict liability rules apply. Experts have testified in past cases that the problems with DePuy's products were well-known before the medical devices even came onto the market.

One of the two expert witnesses, a professor of biomedical engineering and surgery at McGill University, testified at a previous DePuy trial that the rate of adverse events associated with the metal-on-metal hip implants produced by DePuy should have caused alarm and raised "red flags" as far back as 2003. This was before the DePuy hip implants were even released on the market. The other expert criticized DePuy's effect analysis and the company's failure mode.

DePuy is likely seeking to prevent these two expert witnesses from testifying because it believes that the evidence presented significantly damages the defense case. DePuy is trying to prevent the testimony from being presented during a multi-district litigation and submitted supporting briefs barring the testimony on June 14, 2013.

The judge will now need to make a decision on whether these experts should be permitted to testify in the upcoming bellwether trial in September. If the judge permits the experts to testify, then it is likely that the information presented will once again be damaging to DePuy Orthopaedic's case. Both DePuy Orthopaedics and the plaintiffs who wish to present testimony from the experts will have a chance to make arguments to the judge about whether the testimony should be allowed.

Determining what evidence is or is not admissible in a case against a drug manufacturer can be a complex and technical process. Responding to actions such as this one is just one of the many tasks that attorneys will do to help victims of defective metal-on-metal hip implants to get the justice they deserve.

Continue reading "Johnson & Johnson Tries to Block Experts in DePuy Hip Implant Cases " »

Transvaginal Mesh Supplier May Have Used Plastic Not Suitable For Human Implantation

For women suffering from pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence, transvaginal mesh manufacturers promised surgical solutions that would help to correct their health issues. Unfortunately, transvaginal mesh or TVM turned out to be a very dangerous product that caused a number of complications including significant pain; recurrent prolapse and breakdown of the mesh in the body. 1420892_plastic_model_parts_in_frame.jpg

Since transvaginal mesh not only failed to perform as promised but also caused harm, many patients have taken action against TVM manufacturers. In one lawsuit against a TVM manufacturer, plaintiffs are alleging that the manufacturer knowingly used a plastic that was not safe for use in people. Our Boston transvaginal mesh lawyers know that TVM from all manufacturers has generally proved to be dangerous. However, this new evidence indicates that at least one manufacturer may have gone beyond simply failing to disclose risks and instead intentionally acted in a way likely to cause harm.

Emails Show Transvaginal Mesh Manufacturers Intentionally Put Patients at Risk

According to a June 26 Bloomberg news article, CR Bard may have knowingly sold vaginal mesh devices that were made of a plastic material manufacturers had warned was not suitable for implantation in humans.

The plastic was made by a Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. unit and was resin-based. Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. had registered a warning that the mesh should not be permanently implanted in people and after this warning was issued, managers at Bard's Davol unit knowingly used the plastic in mesh units intended for the treatment of hernias. Now, plaintiffs in a transvaginal mesh claim contend that this same unsafe mesh was also used not just in hernia products but in transvaginal mesh products as well.

Evidence indicates that CR Bard Inc. acted intentionally to use this unsafe plastic, rather than just simply using it by mistake. For example, two emails were sent in 2004 and in 2007 by Davol executives warning colleagues not to tell Chevron Phillips or other manufacturers of the resin-plastic that the plastics were being used in medical devices that were placed in people.

One of the e-mails sent by a top Bard executive, who is now a vice president at the company, expressly cautioned that Chevron Phillips would probably "not be interested in a medical application due to product liability concerns." The same email indicated that Davol shouldn't be mentioned to any of the manufacturers because the manufacturers likely were unaware of C.R. Bard's implant applications.

These emails are extremely incriminating because they can be used to demonstrate that top executives in the company knowingly made the decision to use a plastic that was proven unsafe, despite an awareness that people could get hurt.

It is not unreasonable to believe that the same plastic was used not just in mesh used to treat hernia injuries but also in patients undergoing surgical procedures with transvaginal mesh. Plaintiffs in TVM cases may thus be able to use the emails to strengthen their claim against the medical device company, by presenting the emails as proof that Bard intentionally took dangerous risks with patient health.

Continue reading "Transvaginal Mesh Supplier May Have Used Plastic Not Suitable For Human Implantation " »