Author Archives: William L. Doerler

Westinghouse Portable Generators Recalled by MWE Investments


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On December 7, 2017, the Consumer Product Safety Commission announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Westinghouse Portable Generators Recalled by MWE Investments Due to Fire Hazard

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .

Consumer Product Safety Commission Announces Numerous Hoverboard Recalls


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. Continue reading

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .

Nevada Refuses to Increase Plaintiff’s Burden Of Proof for Product Liability Design Defect Claim


This entry was posted by on .

In the United States, to prove a products liability claim based upon a design defect, the plaintiff must either meet: (1) the consumer-expectation test, or (2) the risk-utility test, depending upon the jurisdiction. Although Nevada has historically followed the consumer-expectation test, in a recent decision the Supreme Court of Nevada evaluated whether to adopt the more stringent risk-utility test. Ultimately, the court rejected adoption of the risk-utility test and reaffirmed its prior precedent holding that a plaintiff need only meet the consumer-expectation test. See Ford Motor Company v. Trejo, 2017 Nev. LEXIS 90 (September 27, 2017).

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Nevada, Products Liability and tagged , .

Colorado Requires Privity to Pursue Warranty of Suitability Claim Against Developer


This entry was posted by on .

In Forest City Stapleton, Inc. v. Rodgers, 393 P.3d 487 (Colo. 2017), the Supreme Court of Colorado considered whether a home buyer needed privity of contract to pursue an implied warranty of suitability claim against a developer who sold a vacant lot to a professional builder. Finding that that warranty of suitability claims are contractual claims, the court held that the home buyer needed to be in privity of contract with the developer.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Colorado, Construction Defects, Warranty-Implied and tagged , .

BSH Home Appliances Expands Recall of Dishwashers


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On October 20, 2017, the Consumer Product Safety Commission announced the following expanded recall related to Bosch, Gaggenau, Jenn-Air and Thermador products that present a fire hazard:

BSH Home Appliances Expands Recall of Dishwashers Due to Fire Hazard

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .

Contract Terms Can Impact the Accrual Date For Florida’s Statute of Repose


This entry was posted by on .

When the validity of a construction defect claim depends on whether the claim is barred by the applicable state’s statute of repose, it is important to review the statute to identify when claims subject to the statute of repose accrue. In Busch v. Lennar Homes, LLC, 219 So.3d 93 (Fla. Ct. App. (5th Dist.) 2017), the Court of Appeals of Florida clarified the accrual date for the statute of repose in cases where the accrual date depends on a construction contract’s completion date. Pursuant to Busch, the date of full performance under the contract, not the building’s purchase closing date, is the date on which claims accrue.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Construction Defects, Florida, Statute of Limitations-Repose and tagged , .

Saber Grills Recalls Grills and LP Regulators


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On September 26, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Saber Grills Recalls Grills and LP Regulators Due to Fire and Burn Hazards

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .

Kawasaki Recalls Brute Force 300 All-Terrain Vehicles


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On September 6, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Kawasaki Recalls Brute Force 300 All-Terrain Vehicles Due to Fire Hazard

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .

Academy Sports + Outdoors Recalls Crawfish Kits with Strainer


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On August 23, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Academy Sports + Outdoors Recalls Crawfish Kits with Strainer Due to Fire Hazard

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .

Avoiding Split Decisions: The Pitfalls of Proceeding Separately from the Insured


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation actions, the insurer, as subrogee, steps into the shoes of its insured. However, problems can arise when an insured has uninsured losses. In this situation, both the insurer and the insured have a right to file suit against the tortfeasor. The possibility of two different lawsuits raises a number of issues, such as whether: 1) proceeding separately impermissibly splits the cause of action; 2) the insured’s attorney is entitled to attorney’s fees under the common fund doctrine; and 3) the insurer can proceed before the insured is made whole. In light of these issues, subrogating insurers should proceed with caution before filing suit separately from the insured.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Subrogation and tagged , , .