Products Liability

NHTSA Examines 2.7 Million General Motors SUVs and Trucks for Potential Fire Hazard

June 27, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is taking a closer look at 21 General Motors truck and SUV models that were made between 2006 and 2008 over concerns of a potential fire hazard.

Over 2.7 million GM vehicles are part of the probe to see if a fire might ignite inside the engine when the ignition is turned on. According to the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI), there have been 41 reports of non-crash engine compartment fires, with 8 of these incidents resulting in substantial property damage.

Investigators are looking at the engine, the electrical system, the battery cables, the circuit breakers, the fuses, wiring, and the engine cooling system as part of their probe.

Car Fires

Car fires can be deadly. In 2004, 520 people died as a result of a car fire in the United States, and there were 266,000 motor vehicle fires overall. While poor maintenance or involvement in a traffic collision can sometimes cause a car fire, fluid leaks, loose wiring, cracked insulation, or other defects can also lead to auto fires.

The burn injuries that can result when someone is hurt in a car fire can be excruciatingly painful, and a fire victim may need to undergo painful surgeries to recover.

If you were injured or your property was damaged in a car fire, our Maryland products liability lawyers can determine whether your injuries were caused by a defect in the car. A product can become defective if its design was defective or because of mistakes made during manufacturing. Your product also may have a defect as a result of negligent marketing.

Feds Investigating Engine Fires in GM Trucks, SUVs, US News and World Report, June 19, 2008
NHTSA Investigates 2.7 Million GM Trucks, SUVs, Consumer Affairs, June 17, 2008
New Warning to Be Issued About Deadly Car Fires, ABC News, October 12, 2005

Related Web Resource:

General Motors

As Summer Travel Season Starts, NHTSA Warns 15-Passenger Van Users to Drive Carefully

June 20, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the months of June through August are when the highest number of 15-passenger van injuries and deaths occur. 31% of all deadly 15-passenger van rollovers take place during this season, which is why the NHTSA wants drivers of these large vans to drive carefully and make sure that they follow the proper safety measures.

15 Passenger Vans

These large vans are designed to transport a large number of people and significant cargo. As a result, 15-passenger vans are a popular choice of transportation for large families, school kids, church groups, nursing homes, and others.

Over the last several years, however, there has been a noticeable trend of injuries and deaths occurring to passengers—in particular, students, being transported in these vehicles.

After analyzing 1,957 crashes the NHTSA found that the more passengers riding in these vans—even within the 15-passenger limit, the more likely these vans were to rollover and cause serious injury or death.

One reason for this is that 15-passenger vans are designed with a high center of gravity, which moves higher and towards the rear whenever the weight in the van gets heavier. This increases the chances of rollovers.

Other hazards that can cause injury or harm upon rollover include:

• Lack of laminated side windows to cushion a passenger
• No emergency exits
• Insufficient crash padding

Motor vehicle accidents that occur because of a defect in a vehicle can be grounds for personal injury or wrongful death claims if someone gets hurt or dies.

In Maryland and Washington DC, our auto products liability lawyers can discuss your case with you.

Rollover Crashes for 15-Passenger Vans More Likely during Summer, NHTSA.gov
15-Passenger Vans: High-Riding Death Traps, Safetyforum.com

Related Web Resource:

15-Passenger Van Safety Hazards

Pilot Sues Boeing For Personal Injuries From F-15C Breakup Jet Accident

March 25, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Maj. Stephen Stilwell, an air force pilot, is suing plane manufacturer Boeing over the F-15C airplane accident that left him disfigured and with debilitating shoulder injuries. The plane was built by defense contractor McDonald Douglas, which was purchased by Boeing Corp.

In his personal injury lawsuit, Stilwell says that the plane started “shaking violently” during a routine training mission. He ejected himself from the plane and was seriously injured when he was struck by parts of the plane, which had started to disintegrate.

According to air force investigators, there were cracks in the aircraft parts that caused the failure. These parts were installed without implementation of the correct safety measures.

After the plane crash, all of the F-15’s were grounded for inspection, with several of them staying there after similar cracks were discovered.

Stilwell says the accident has affected his ability to work as a civilian/military aircraft pilot. Stilwell contends that Boeing should have known that its F-15C was a dangerous/defective product that was susceptible to breaking apart during flight.

Product manufacturers, sellers, and distributors are responsible for making sure that their products will not cause harm to any users. Grounds for a products liability lawsuit can include:

Negligence: Failure to act with reasonable care to make sure that a product is safe for use.

Strict Liability: If a person is injured by a product, the manufacturer can be held liable even if he or she did not act negligently.

Misrepresentation: Marketing, promoting, or presenting a product in a manner that misrepresents the actual safety or risks that come with using a product.

Breach of Warranty: The manufacturer is in breach of the warranty that accompanies its product.

If you are injured on the job by a defective product, you usually will not be able to sue your employer, but you can file third party lawsuits against other liable parties, such as the manufacturer or distributor of the product. You may also be eligible for workers’ compensation benefits from your employer’s insurer.

In Maryland and Washington D.C., one of our products liability lawyers would be happy to speak with you.

Pilot hurt in jet breakup sues Boeing, CNN.com, March 25, 2008

Related Web Resources:

The Boeing Company

Plane Crash Info

General Motors Settles Auto Defect Injury Claim Involving GMC Yukon

March 19, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

General Motors Corporation will pay an undisclosed settlement amount to California resident Michael Samardzich, whose left eye was ruptured and became permanently blind when the GMC Yukon that he was a passenger in collided with another motor vehicle on July 7, 2006. The teenager filed a products liability claim against the auto manufacturing giant for his injuries.

The force of the crash shattered the side passenger window of the SUV and the pieces of glass damaged Samardzich’s eye. Police reports indicate that he was wearing a seatbelt when the auto accident occurred.

Personal injury attorneys for Samardzich say that the teenager would not have suffered the permanent loss of vision if GM had made the passenger window with laminated glass instead of tempered glass, which is less costly and is known to break and shatter more easily.

The fragility of tempered glass can be a problem when a motor vehicle crash occurs. Not only can pieces of glass cut the victim’s skin or get into their eyes or other organs, but passengers in a vehicle have a greater chance of being thrown from the vehicle if the glass in the side windows is shattered.

Auto manufacturers know that laminated glass is the stronger glass, which is why this type of glass is used in the windshields of all motor vehicles sold in the United States.

In Maryland and Washington D.C., our personal injury law firm represents clients that have been injured in motor vehicle accidents caused by negligent drivers, defective auto parts, and other negligent parties.

Defective auto parts cases may involve:

• Defective tires
• Seat back failure
• Auto recalls
• SUV rollovers
• Faulty air bags
• Roof crushes
• Gasoline tank explosions
• Defective door latches
• Defective seat belts
General Motors Agrees To Settle Automobile Defect Claim For Undisclosed Sum, RTT News, February 20, 2008
General Motors Settles in Auto Defect Claim; Plaintiff Claimed Laminated Sidelites Would Have Protected Him, GlassBytes.com

Related Web Resource:

Coalition for Auto Glass Safety and Public Awareness

Insurance Institute For Highway Safety Says Making Stronger SUV Roofs Could Save Lives During Rollover Accidents

March 13, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Test results conducted by the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety found that the stronger the SUV’s roof, the lower the risks of serious injury or death.

The IIHS tested 11 sport utility vehicles and found that the stronger roofs had a 39%-57% lower injury risk than SUVs with weaker roofs.

The IIHS says that over 200 lives could have been saved in 2006, during rollover accidents, if the SUVs had better roofs. 35% of motor vehicle deaths involve rollover crashes, with 60% of these rollovers involving SUVs.

The SUV’s roof that received the highest strength rating was the 2000-2004 Nissan Xterra. The SUV’s roof that received the lowest strength rating was the 1999- 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee.

A roof that crushes in during a rollover can cause serious injuries to passengers, who can sustain traumatic brain injuries or traumatic brain injuries when struck by the crushed roof.

Examples tragic SUV rollover accidents involving crushed roofs:

• Tyler Moody, 18, died of “positional asphyxiation “during an SUV rollover crash. His family’s wrongful death attorneys said the crushed roof cut off his breathing.

• Recently, a California appeals court ordered Ford to pay a paralyzed woman $82.6 million for injuries sustained during an SUV rollover also involving a crushed roof.

A trade group that represents Toyota, GM, Chrysler, and a few other auto makers, called the study flawed.

SUV Accident Facts from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

• Over 90% of SUV rollover crashes are single-car accidents.

• The most common kind of injury sustained in rollover crashes is head trauma.

In Maryland and Washington D.C., our personal injury law firm represents clients in SUV rollover accidents and other kinds ofproducts liability and car accident cases.

Report Says Weak SUV Roofs Are Deadly, U.S. News, March 13, 2008
Crash-test report backs stronger roofs on SUVs, USA Today, March 12, 2008

Related Web Resource:

Roof Strength and Injury Risk in Rollover Crashes (PDF)

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

Mitsubishi Ordered to Pay $11 Million in Products Liability SUV Wrongful Death Case

March 7, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

A Florida jury has ordered Mitsubishi Motors to pay almost $11 million in wrongful death damages to the parents of a man who died when he was partially ejected from a Nativa SUV—marketed in the US as the Montero.

Peter and Donna Laliberte had accused the auto manufacturer of knowing that there were problems with the seat recliner and the seat belt in the SUV and selling the motor vehicles despite this information. Because of these product defects, the Lalibertes contend that Scott,25, ended up being partially ejected from the back window of the 2000 Nativa when the SUV rolled over in September 2004. They had asked the jury to award them over $25 million.

Scott’s head was crushed against the SUV and the ground after he smashed into the rear window.

The almost $11 million award is compensatory damages for the loss of the Lalibertes’ son. $10 million is for pain and suffering and the rest of the amount is to cover funeral expenses and other costs.

Part of the case made against Mitsubishi was that auto maker tried to correct the design flaws on the 2000 model by bring out a revised model halfway through the model year without letting anyone know that there had been problems with the original version.

Mitsubishi, however, argued that the redesigned model did not address flaws with the seat or seat belt and instead fixed issues with the SUV’s front structure, which did not perform well during accident tests.

Mitsubishi has been working hard to rebuild its reputation after the public found out that the auto giant had tried to cover up auto defects by fixing them without issuing recalls even though many accidents had occurred.

Our Maryland and Washington D.C. law firm represent injury and wrongful death clients in SUV accident claims and lawsuits involving negligent drivers and/or defective auto parts.

Seat belt defects include:

• Problems with the seat belt latch
• Problems with the seat belt retractor
• Defects with the seat belt geometry
• Defective seat belt webbing
Mitsubishi must pay $11 million to family of man ejected from SUV, Palm Beach Post, February 26, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Defective Seat Belts are a Big Problem

Mitsubishi Motors

Consumer Product Safety Commission Reports Increase In Nursery Products-Related Infant Deaths

February 29, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The Consumer Product Safety Commission has issued a report that states the number of infant deaths (children under age 5) involving nursery products have increased significantly.

According to the CPSC, 66,400 children were seriously hurt in nurseries in 2006. The number of infant injuries involving nursery products in 200t was 59,800.

The report did not take into account injuries in 2007 when more than one million Simplicity bassinets and cribs were recalled. At least 4 infants died because of the defective infant beds. The Chicago Tribune conducted an investigation that found that CPSC and Simplicity had known that defective infant crib parts and improper installation could lead to suffocation, even death.

The CPSC report cited a number of Infant products associated with infant injuries, including:

• Cribs
• Bassinets
• Strollers
• Infant carriers
• Car seats
• High chairs
• Walkers

Sometimes the cause of the injuries has been a defective product or product failure. Falls were also a leading cause of injuries. 42% of the injuries sustained by infants were head injuries.

Toys have also come under fire as a cause of serious injuries or deaths affecting children of all ages. Last year, 25 million toys were recalled because of defective product concerns.

In the event that your child was injured because of a defective product, the instructions that came with the product was incomplete or unclear, or the product did not come with a failure to warn of potential injuries or hazards, one of our Maryland or Washington D.C. lawyers would be happy to discuss your case during a free consultation.

Nursery-related product injuries on the rise, CNNMoney.com, February 28, 2008
Infant Deaths in the Nursery Increasing, Consumer Affairs, February 28, 2008
Nursery Product Injuries Sending More Children to the ER, NewsInferno.com, February 29, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Infants & Children, Recall-Warnings

Woman Sues Ocean City, Maryland Hotel Over Carbon Monoxide Deaths of Her Husband and Daughter

February 21, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

In Maryland’s U.S. District Court in Baltimore, Pennsylvania resident Yvonne Boughter filed a wrongful death lawsuit over the carbon monoxide deaths of her husband, Patrick J. Boughter, 40, and his 10-year-old daughter Kelly. She is seeking $30 million in damages.

The Boughters, from Lebanon, Pennsylvania, were staying at the Days Inn motel on 23rd Street in Ocean City in June 2006 when the accident occurred. An investigation into the deaths found that gas was able to enter the room they were staying in through a disconnected water heater pipe in the basement. The exposure to the gas killed Patrick and Kelly. Yvonne and their daughter Morgan survived.

Defendants named in the case are Bay Shore Development Corp, Heat Transfer Products Inc., R.E. Michel Co. Inc., and All About Plumbing. Bay Shore owns the motel. Heat Transfer Products made the water heater. R.E. Michaels sold the water heater to Bay Shore. All About Plumbing installed the water heater in the hotel. Wyndham Hotel Group is the parent company of the Days Inn.

Boughter is asking for $20 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages. Loss of family and future income from Patrick’s job as a welder were considered by the plaintiff when calculating an amount.

The lawsuit comes after an extensive probe into the deadly accident, as well as another carbon monoxide leak that occurred at the Days Inn in 2005.

Premises Liability and Products Liability

Hotel owners are supposed to ensure that there are no unsafe conditions on their premise that could harm visitors or guests. They can be held liable for personal injury or wrongful death if someone is seriously hurt or died from a hazardous condition on the property.

Manufacturers, sellers, and distributors of a defective product can also be held for products liability if a consumer was injured or killed by that product.

In Maryland and Washington D.C., one of our experienced personal injury lawyers would be happy to discuss your case.

Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

Carbon Monoxide (CO), often referred to as “the silent killer,” is the number one cause of accidental poisoning fatalities in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control says that 15,000 people visit the hospital every year due to carbon monoxide poisoning. About 500 CO poisoning deaths occur annually.

Some Sources of Carbon Monoxide:
• Charcoal grills
• Gas water heaters
• Propane heaters
• Propane stoves
• Cigarette smoke
• Generators powered by gasoline and diesel
• A boat run by an engine
• Paint removers
• Spray paint
• Degreasers
• Solvents
Widow sues OC hotel over carbon monoxide deaths, MDDailyrecord.com, February 19, 2008
Wrongful death suit filed in resort carbon monoxide deaths, Examiner.com, February 20, 2008

Related Web Resource:

Carbon Monoxide Poisoning, EMedicineHealth

NTSB Says Design Error Caused Deadly 2007 Minneapolis Bridge Collapse

January 15, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The National Transportation Safety Board says that a design flaw is what led to undersized gusset plates holding the steel beams on Interstate 35-W bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota to snap and the bridge to collapse into the Mississippi River last August. More than 100 people were injured and 13 others were killed.

According to NTSB Chairman Mark V. Rosenker, investigators discovered 16 fractured gusset plates—which were reportedly half the thickness that they need to be and were installed that way. Rosenker said investigators could not locate the design calculations to determine the source of the design flaw. He also stated that there was no evidence to indicate that corrosion, cracking, or other wear was responsible for the bridge collapse.

Investigators have suggested that a construction going on at the bridge at the time of the accident may have been put much weight and pressure on the bridge’s structure.

After the accident in August, Minnesota officials said that the eight-lane bridge, open since 1967, had passed inspections for years—albeit without flying colors. During a 2006 inspection, the Minneapolis Bridge rated a 4 out of 9 for its supporting structure, which was in reportedly poor condition.

As far back as 1990, the federal government had categorized the bridge as structurally deficient. The bridge, like many bridges built in the 1950’s and 1960’s, was missing the redundant protection needed to reduce the types of single structural failures that can cause the bridge to come crashing down.

When flaws in the design of a product results in serious injuries, the manufacturer of the product, the companies that installed or made the product available for use, and the person responsible for authorizing the product’s use can be held liable in a products liability lawsuit.

The owner of an unsafe premise—whether public or private—can also be held liable if a person is injured on a property because the premise itself or a condition on the premise was unsafe, hazardous, or improperly maintained. A premises liability lawsuit may even name a local, state, or federal government entity if the plaintiff has grounds to hold them responsible for the injuries or deaths.

NTSB: Minneapolis bridge that collapsed had design flaw, CNN.com, January 15, 2008
Design Flaw Said to Have Caused Minn. Bridge to Collapse, Washington Post, January 15, 2008
Minneapolis Bridge Had Passed Inspections, New York Times, August 3, 2007

Related Web Resource:

National Transportation Safety Board

Window Washer Who Fell 47 Stories Will File Personal Injury Lawsuit

January 4, 2008 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The man who survived the force of gravity when he fell 47 stories while getting ready to wash the windows of a Manhattan building plans to file a personal injury lawsuit against the company that installed the scaffolding that broke, as well as the skyscraper’s management company.

37-year-old window washer Alcides Moreno says it just wasn’t his time to die after he dropped more than 500 feet to land on the ground and lived to tell his tale.

The catastrophic work accident occurred on December 7 while Alcides and his brother Edgar were cleaning windows on the Upper East Side. Edgar died of his injuries.

Doctors say the fact that Alcides even survived is a miracle. He has already undergone nine surgeries and is starting to talk. More surgeries are expected.

Alcides arrived in the ER at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center with brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, abdominal injuries, chest injuries, and fractures to his legs, ribs, and one of his arms. He received 19 blood plasma units 24 units of blood. Alcides is expected to make a slow but substantial recovery.

According to the Department of Buildings, the scaffolding the two men were standing on fell because the cables connecting it to the roof snapped. The two brothers had previously voiced concerns about the safety conditions at the building, located on E. 66th St.

Solow Management Corp is the building’s management company and Trachtel Group is the company that installed the scaffolding. The Moreno brothers worked for City Wide Window Cleaning.

If you are seriously injury in a work accident anywhere in Maryland or Washington D.C., workers’ compensation guarantees you benefits to pay for medical expenses. However, this does not mean that you should not speak to an experienced workers’ compensation attorney to make sure that you are receiving the maximum benefits for your injuries.

Although you cannot sue your employer for personal injury, there may be other parties that can be held liable for your injuries.

Family, NYC hospital officials describe window washer’s ‘miracle’ recovery, Newsday, January 3, 2008
Hurt window washer will sue, NY DailyNews, January 2, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Solow Management Corporation, NY Bites