Posts Tagged ‘Defective Product Lawyer’

Toyota Recall Demonstrates Value of Personal Injury Liability

Friday, October 9th, 2009

Toyota recall lawyer 300x225 Toyota Recall Demonstrates Value of Personal Injury LiabilityBy now, many people have heard about Toyota’s recall of 3.8 million vehicles to replace defective floor mats, which jammed into the accelerator of a Toyota vehicle, causing Troy Johnson to die in a car crash.  The story that unfortunately has been overlooked, is what prompted Toyota to issue its largest recall ever in the United States.

The answer is the risk of liability in future personal injury and product liability lawsuits.  Without the right to file such a lawsuit against individuals and corporations such as Toyota for manufacturing and distributing dangerous products that put people’s lives in danger, those individuals and corporations would have no “business” incentive to make safer products.

This week, Toyota disclosed to the United States government that it is sending mail to owners of several Toyota vehicles, including the Camry, Prius hybrid, and other models, requesting that they remove floor mats on the driver’s side, and to not replace them.  Toyota said that the gas pedal may get stuck when the floor mat is unsecured or incompatible, causing the car to accelerate at high speeds, making it difficult to stop, and potentially causing the driver and passengers to be seriously injured or killed in a car crash.

Melodie Bohuchot, the widow of Troy Johnson, told the Associated Press yesterday that she wants Toyota to “fix the problem now.  Don’t wait.”  She asked a rhetorical question which goes to the heart of the decision to recall a vehicle, “How many people have to die before they take this seriously?”

The answer for Toyota, it appears, is five.  Mr. Johnson was killed in a car crash on July 26, 2007, when his car was hit from behind on a highway by a 2007 Toyota Camry, whose accelerator had allegedly become jammed by the defective floor mat.  The Camry was speeding at nearly 120 mph and slammed into Mr. Johnson’s vehicle, killing him instantly, after his car burst into flames.  Toyota reached a product liability and personal injury settlement with Mr. Johnson’s widow in 2008.  Apparently, one death was not sufficient to prompt a recall.

In August 2009, four more people were killed in a similar high-speed accident caused by the defective floor mat.  This time, a father, his wife, his brother-in-law, and his 13-year-old daughter were killed in a car crash.  It was only after this accident that Toyota began initiating a recall.  Hopefully, the family of these four family members will retain, if they have not done so already, an experienced personal injury and product liability lawyer to represent their interests.  No doubt, the civil liability exposure is what prompted Toyota to consider a recall.

Maybe Toyota should have initiated a recall after Mr. Johnson was killed in the car crash caused by the defective floor mat?  Maybe not?  Only Toyota — their engineers, their executives, their researchers, their lawyers have that answer.  The bottom line, though, is Toyota’s realization of substantial civil liability exposure from future accidents caused by their defective floor mats caused them to make this recall.

As a Chicago personal injury lawyer, I am proud to represent those whose voices would otherwise go unheard, and to play an integral role in making individuals and corporations act safely and manufacture and distribute safe products.  Hopefully, Toyota will be able to notify most, if not all, of the 3.8 million American car owners of the recall, and prevent another person from being seriously injured or killed in a car crash caused by the defective floor mat.

For a free consultation with one of our Chicago personal injury and product liability lawyers, call Passen Law Group at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Toyota Recall Demonstrates Value of Personal Injury Liability

New Consumer Safety Requirements for Children’s Products

Wednesday, August 26th, 2009

child crib safety defects 300x187 New Consumer Safety Requirements for Childrens ProductsOn Friday, August 14, 2009, new requirements went into effect for the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA).  These new requirements are important not only for makers and sellers of products, especially paint and children’s toys, but also for parents, product liability lawyers and the general public. For a free consultation with a top Chicago product liability lawyer and personal injury attorney, call Passen Law Group at (312) 527-4500.

The Chicago Tribune, as well as other news organizations, recently reported product recalls of the Simplicity, Inc. bassinets, which were linked to several strangulation deaths of young children.  Parents and other consumers were urged to immediately stop using the convertible “close-sleeper/bedside sleeper” bassinets  due to the serious safety risk.

If you or a loved one has lost a child due to a defective product meant for children, such as toys or baby cribs or bassinets, contact an experienced product liability attorney today. Since products such as unsafe toys and defective cribs fall under product liability law, there is a statute of limitations, or a specific time frame for bringing a case.  Baby clothes, toys and cribs are staple garage sale items, and can be exchanged between friends with neither knowing about a product recall.

One of the new CPSIA requirements is designed to assist in the tracking of products once they leave the maker or manufacturer.  Specifically, manufacturers who make any product for children 12 years-old or younger must place “permanent displaying marks (tracking label) [to] enable consumers to ascertain basic information, including the manufacturer or private labeler, location, the date of manufacturer and more detailed information on the manufacturing process such as a batch number.”  The new requirement also specifies that the tracking label appear on the product AND the product packaging.

Such information will make it easier for parents to more easily check and see if their product is part of a recall.

Other important requirements that went into effect include:

•    Limit for lead content in children’s products drops to 600 parts per million
•    Limit for lead pain and similar surface coating materials for consumer use drops to 90 parts per million
•    Maximum in civil penalties increases to $100,000 per violation
•    Maximum for a series of violations increases to $15 million

These are important changes to CPSIA 2008 that all personal injury and product liability lawyers must be aware of when handling cases, after August 14, 2009, that involve children’s toys, lead paint and other potentially harmful products.  To speak with a top Chicago product liability lawyer concerning a dangerous or defective children’s product, call Passen Law Group at 312-527-4500 for a free consultation.

share save 171 16 New Consumer Safety Requirements for Childrens Products

Understanding Product Liability and Defective Products Claims

Sunday, August 16th, 2009

In the simplest terms, “liability” is defined as “the state of being legally obliged and responsible.” Product Liability, then, is a specific area of law where a manufacture or seller of a defective product is held liable, or responsible, for any injuries or damages suffered as a result of the defective product.  To speak with a top Chicago defective product injury lawyer, contact Passen Law Group at (312) 527-4500 for a free consultation.

Product liability applies to a wide range of products, from automobile design, tires, air bags and car seats to medical devices like pace makers, unsafe toys like the Magnetix build sets, cribs and even unsafe pharmaceutical drugs.

Product liability cases require taking on the powerful interests of manufacturers and retailers who are typically large corporations, while also understanding the nuances of specific state statutes that govern product liability cases.  A seasoned products liability lawyer can help you navigate both areas.

In a typical products liability action, there are three theories of liability:

1.    Negligence
2.    Strict Liability
3.    Breach of Warranty

Negligence follows the same “ordinary care” or “reasonableness” rule.  If a manufacturer failed to exercise care while designing, testing or inspecting a product, the manufacturer may be held liable, or responsible, for injury or death resulting from the product.  Manufacturers can also be held liable if they fail to provide adequate instructions and labeling, and if they fail to issue a recall notice.

A common example are car accidents as a result of defective tires.  If the tire separates from the rim or blows out, serious car accidents, and serious injuries result.  Such was the case with the Bridgestone/Firestone tire recall of 2000.

Strict liability means that the manufacturer can be held liable, even without proof of negligence, if the plaintiff can prove two things:
1.    Defect existed at the time the product left manufacturer
2.    Defect cause the injury

Breach of Express Warranty has to do with the written piece of paper with “Warranty” or “Guarantee” written across the top. This piece of paper essentially acts as a “contract of fitness” between you and the manufacturer or vendor.  A breach of implied warranty may arise if the defect makes the product “unfit” for its intended purpose, even in the absence of specific written warranty language.

In Illinois, product liability cases are governed by 735 ILCS 5/2‑621.  It outlines the proper procedure for filing, and responding to, a product liability case, and under what circumstances a court may or may not dismiss a case.  It also outlines what happens if the manufacturer no longer exists, or if the wrong manufacturer information was given.

Contact the law offices of Passen Law Group today if you or a loved one has been seriously injured as a result of a defective product.  Call us at (312) 527-4500 for a free consultation.  Our product liability and dangerous or defective products attorneys can help you navigate the different areas of your product liability case.

share save 171 16 Understanding Product Liability and Defective Products Claims