Category Archives: Products Liability

Recall Alert

Real Flame Recalls Arroyo and Hideaway Wood Burning Fire Pits Due to Fire Hazard


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 July 15, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Real Flame Recalls Arroyo and Hideaway Wood Burning Fire Pits Due to Fire Hazard; Sold Exclusively at Crate and Barrel (Recall Alert).

According to the CPSC, “[w]ood stored under the unit can ignite, posing a fire hazard.”

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

Echo EGi-2300 Watt Generators Recalled Due to Fire and Burn Hazards


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 July 8, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

ECHO EGi-2300 Watt Generators Recalled Due to Fire and Burn Hazards; Manufactured by TTI (Recall Alert).

According to the CPSC, “[t]he unit can overheat, posing fire and burn hazards to consumers.”

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

Amazon Avoids Liability (Again) for Defective Products Sold by Third Parties Through Its Website


This entry was posted by on .

On June 25, 2021, the Texas Supreme Court held that Amazon cannot be liable for defective third-party products sold on its website, even when Amazon controls the transaction and delivery of the product, because Amazon never relinquishes or holds title to the products. This opinion should result in the reversal of a prior decision by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas – which found that Amazon was a “seller” under Texas law – and causes further division in the jurisdictions in the United States regarding whether Amazon can be held liable for defective third-party products. Continue reading

This entry was posted in Products Liability, Texas and tagged , , .
Product Recall

Cove Appliance Recalls 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 June 16, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Cove Appliance Recalls Dishwashers Due to Fire Hazard.

According to the CPSC, “[t]he heating element in the dishwasher can fail to properly shut off and can overheat, posing a fire hazard.”

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

Examination of the Product Does Not Stop a Pennsylvania Court From Applying the Malfunction Theory


This entry was posted by on .

Pennsylvania recognizes the malfunction theory in product liability cases. This theory allows a plaintiff to circumstantially prove that a product is defective by showing evidence of a malfunction and eliminating abnormal use or reasonable, secondary causes for the malfunction. The malfunction theory is available to plaintiffs as an alternative to proving a traditional strict product liability case in those circumstances where direct evidence of a product defect is not found. In Pa. Nat’l Mut. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Sam’s East, Inc., 727 MDA 2020, 2021 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 752, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania (Superior Court) considered whether the plaintiffs could avail themselves to the malfunction theory if the plaintiffs’ expert was able to examine the product. Continue reading

This entry was posted in Litigation, Pennsylvania, Products Liability, Subrogation and tagged , , .
Product Recall

Consumer Product Safety Commission 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. On May 13, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:

  1. BRP Recalls Snowmobiles Due to Fire Hazard (Recall Alert). According to the CPSC, “[t]he snowmobile’s muffler can overheat and cause the upper right-hand vent grill to melt and drip plastic on the exhaust, posing a fire hazard . . . .”
  2. Polaris Recalls RZR Recreational Off-Road Vehicles Due to Fire Hazard (Recall Alert). According to the CPSC, “[t]he vehicles were manufactured without copper seal washers on the turbocharger’s oil supply line, which can result in an oil leak, posing a fire hazard.”
This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .
Gavel

Industry Standard and Sole Negligence Defenses Can’t Fix a Defect


This entry was posted by on .

Strict products liability cases have been the subject of much fluctuation in the Pennsylvania courts over the last few years. Utilizing hope created by the courts in recent strict liability cases, defendants have tried to revive defenses based on meeting industry standards and the plaintiff’s contributory negligence. Recently, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania tempered that hope with limitations of how far strict liability defenses can extend. Continue reading

This entry was posted in Comparative-Contributory Negligence, Evidence, Negligence, Pennsylvania, Products Liability and tagged , , .
Recall Alert

Kidde Recalls Trusense Smoke and Combination Smoke/Carbon Monoxide Alarms


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 May 6, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire-related risk:

Kidde Recalls TruSense Smoke and Combination Smoke/Carbon Monoxide Alarms Due to Risk of Failure to Alert Consumers to a Fire.

According to the CPSC, “[t]he smoke alarm and the combination smoke/carbon monoxide (CO) alarm can fail to alert consumers to a fire.”

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

Scott Fetzer Consumer Brands Recalls Multi-Use Water Pumps


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 May 5, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Scott Fetzer Consumer Brands Recalls Multi-Use Water Pumps Due to Fire and Shock Hazards.

According to the CPSC, “[i]f water gets into the electrical circuit board, it can short circuit, posing fire, burn and electrical shock hazards.”

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

Recalled Products Sold by PTAC Crew And PTAC UDA After Recalls Were Announced


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 April 28, 2021, the CPSC, PTAC Crew and PTAC USA warned consumers regarding units that PTAC Crew and PTAC USA refurbished and resold after they were previously recalled between 2004 and 2018. The recall relates to packaged terminal air conditioner (PTAC), packaged terminal heat pump (PTHP) and room air conditioner (RAC) units. You can find the full details of the recall at the link below:

Recalled Products Sold by PTAC Crew and PTAC USA After Recalls Were Announced.

According to the CPSC, “[h]azards include fire and/or burn depending on the product.”

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