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 June 23, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:

  1. SunVilla™ Corporation Recalls Solar LED Market Umbrellas Due to Fire and Burn Hazards; Sold Exclusively at Costco (Recall Alert). According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he lithium-ion batteries in the umbrella’s solar panels can overheat, posing fire and burn hazards.”
  2. MTD Products Recalls Troy-Bilt Spacesavr Walk-Behind Self-Propelled Lawn Mowers Due to Fire Hazard. According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he mower can leak fuel when it is stored in the upright (vertical) storage position, posing a fire hazard.”
This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .
Recall Alert

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 June 16, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:

  1. Sienhua Group Recalls WarmWave and Hunter Ceramic Tower Heaters Due to Fire and Burn Hazards. According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he ceramic tower heater’s cord and plug can overheat when in use, posing fire and burn hazards.”
  1. Schneider ElectricTM Recalls 1.4 Million Electrical Panels Due to Thermal Burn and Fire Hazards. According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he load center can overheat, posing thermal burn and fire hazards.”
This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability and tagged .
Product Recall

Spirit Halloween Recalls Black Light Fixtures


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 9, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Spirit Halloween Recalls Black Light Fixtures Due to Fire and Burn Hazards.

According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he bulb in the fixture can pop, flash and overheat, posing fire and burn hazards.”

Product images from the CPSC website are set forth below:

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

Celebrating One Year of Subro Sessions Podcast


This entry was posted by on .

Subro Sessions is celebrating one full year of podcasting! We’d like to extend our gratitude to our listeners for their continued support of Subro Sessions. We look forward to providing you with another year of subrogation updates and topics.

On this anniversary episode, “Subrogation Lawyers Reflect on Real Life Fire Training,” a group of Subrogation lawyers recount their hands-on training experience at the Bergenfield Fire Training Academy.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Podcast.
Recall Alert

DEMDACO Recalls Microwavable Bowl Holders


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 2, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

DEMDACO Recalls Microwavable Bowl Holders Due to Fire Hazard.

According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he bowl holder’s fabric can char after being microwaved for the suggested three minutes, posing a fire hazard.”

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

Hold on Just One Second: Texas Clarifies Starting Point for Negligence Statute of Limitations


This entry was posted by on .

In construction or similar ongoing projects, problems often pop up. Sometimes they can pop up again and again. Making things even more complicated, one problem may affect another, seemingly new problem. When these construction problems result in property damage, timelines tend to overlap and determining when a statute of limitation begins to run for a particular claim can be difficult. Especially in states with short statute of limitations for tort claims like Texas, knowing when a statute begins to run is crucial for a subrogation professional. Continue reading

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

The Blame Game: Georgia Updates Its’ Apportionment of Fault Statute to Apply to Single-Defendant Lawsuits


This entry was posted by on .

For all cases filed after May 13, 2022, Georgia has amended its apportionment of fault statute, O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33. The amendment affects subsection (b), which formerly stated that in actions brought against “more than one person for injury to person or property,” the amount of damages awarded, after taking a reduction for the plaintiff’s percentage of fault, shall be apportioned among the person or persons liable according the each person’s percentage of fault. It also eliminated joint liability and the right of contribution. The amended subsection (b) now applies to actions brought “against one or more persons,” thus allowing courts to apply the statute to single-defendant lawsuits. Continue reading

This entry was posted in Contribution-Apportionment, Georgia, Joint or Several Liability and tagged , , , .
Gavel

Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?


This entry was posted by on .

Many courts enforce forum selection clauses in contracts between parties. In W. Bay Plaza Condo. Ass’n v. Sika Corp., No. 3D21-1834, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 1637 (W. Bay Plaza), the Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District (Court of Appeal) answered the question of whether a mandatory forum selection clause in a manufacturer’s warranty was enforceable as to a condominium association, who was a non-signatory. The trial court enforced the forum selection clause – calling for litigation in New Jersey rather than Florida – and the Court of Appeal affirmed the ruling. Continue reading

This entry was posted in Construction Defects, Contracts, Florida, Privity, Warranty – Express and tagged , , , , , , .
Product Recall

Yamaha Recalls Wolverine RMAX Off-Road Side-By-Side 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 May 12, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Yamaha Recalls Wolverine RMAX Off-Road Side-By-Side Vehicles Due to Fire and Explosion Hazards (Recall Alert).

According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he recalled vehicles can have a damaged fuel tank causing fuel to leak, posing fire and explosion hazards.”

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

Waive Your Claim Goodbye: Louisiana Court Holds That AIA Subrogation Waiver Did Not Violate Anti-Indemnification Statute and Applied to Subcontractors


This entry was posted by on .

In 2700 Bohn Motor, LLC v. F.H. Myers Constr. Corp., No. 2021-CA-0671, 2022 La. App. LEXIS 651 (Bohn Motor), the Court of Appeals of Louisiana for the Fourth Circuit (Court of Appeals) considered whether a subrogation waiver in an AIA construction contract was enforceable and, if so, whether the waiver also protected subcontractors that were not signatories to the contract. The lower court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on the subrogation waiver in the construction contract. The plaintiffs appealed the decision, arguing that the subrogation waiver violated Louisiana’s anti-indemnification statute. The plaintiffs also argued that even if enforceable, the subrogation waiver did not apply to the defendant subcontractors since they were not parties to the contract. The Court of Appeals ultimately held that the subrogation waiver did not violate the anti-indemnification statute because the waiver did not shift liability, which the statute was intended to prevent. In addition, the Court of Appeals found that the contract sufficiently satisfied the required elements for the defendant subcontractors to qualify as third-party beneficiaries of the contract.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in AIA Contracts, Contracts, Indemnification, Louisana, Waiver of Subrogation and tagged , , , , , , , .