Defective Products

Motorcycle Products Liability: $360,000.00

10.16.13

Plaintiff was riding his motorcycle on a mountain road in San Bernardino County when the motorcycle slightly in front of plaintiff, driven by his cousin, “bottomed out” and lost control. Plaintiff suffered severe fractures of his arm. Defendants contended that the accident occurred as a result of the other rider’s negligence. Plaintiff contended that a defective component part modifying the clearance caused the motorcycle to bottom out.

The results of every case is dependent upon the specific facts of the case and the results will differ if based on different facts.

Work Site Injury- Defective Product: $5,200,000.00

03.27.13

Plaintiff, a 38 year old shipyard worker, was painting the bottom hull of a ship in a dry dock while standing on a mobile hydraulic elevating platform lift. Plaintiff accidentally leaned over a control lever which caused the platform to rise and pin Plaintiff’s neck between the platform railing and the hull of the ship. The action was brought against the manufacturer and lessor of the subject lift. Plaintiff contended that the lift was defectively dangerous in that the lift control lever was unguarded, permitting inadvertent activation by the operator. Plaintiff also contended that the manufacturer failed to warm of the danger of inadvertent activation. Plaintiff suffered a severe spinal cord injury resulting in quadriplegia.

The results of every case is dependent upon the specific facts of the case and the results will differ if based on different facts.

Medical Malpractice- Defective Product: $2,570,000.00

03.27.13

Baby A was born prematurely, and was receiving parenteral nutrition through an IV system which used a syringe infusion pump to slowly infuse the nutritive solution into the patient at a regulated rate. The components of the pump were incorrectly positions so that the solution directly flowed to the patient, and the pumps alarm which should have alerted the nursing staff of the occluded flow failed to sound. Baby A received an overdose of the solution, causing her blood sugar levels to rise to a hyperglycemic state resulting in seizures. Anti-seizure medication was ordered, but the dosage was miscalculated and the baby received an overdose of anti-seizure medication. The baby went into cardiac arrest, resuscitation efforts were undertaken and the baby was placed on a pacemaker. The baby suffered hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy with cortical blindness and probable deafness, seizure disorder and apenic spells, spastic quadriparesis and permanent full neurologic deficit, sensory deprivation and profound developmental retardation.

The results of every case is dependent upon the specific facts of the case and the results will differ if based on different facts.

Defective Product: $1,000,000.00

03.27.13

Plaintiff was riding in an open bow of a motorboat on the Colorado River, while the Plaintiff’s grandfather was driving the boat, and the boat’s owner was standing next to the Plaintiff’s grandfather giving operating instructions. The plaintiff fell overboard and was paralyzed from the waist down. The plaintiff contended that Defendant Retailer (who sold the boat) and  Defendant Manufacturer were strictly liable, negligent, and there was a breach of warranty for failing to install hand holds and guard rails in the open bow portion of the boat. The defendants argued that a claim based on a lack of hand holds and guard rails was preempted by the federal regulation of maritime matters and the Federal Boating Safety Act.

The results of every case is dependent upon the specific facts of the case and the results will differ if based on different facts.

Motorcycle Products Liability: $8,514,124.00* ($1,900,000.00 Cash Plus Expected Structured Payments of $6,614,125.00)

01.21.13

The plaintiff, an 18 year old male, was operating a custom-built chopper motorcycle that crashed into a tree resulting in brain injuries. Plaintiff contended that the motorcycle and/or defective parts were defectively designed, malfunctioned, and that there was a failure to warn.

The results of every case is dependent upon the specific facts of the case and the results will differ if based on different facts.

Product Liability- Chemical Substance: $1,250,000.00

01.21.13

Plaintiff was removing materials from a hard wood floor using a chemical substance and a floor scrubber machine. A fire started and plaintiff suffered severe burns. Plaintiff contended that the substance was not appropriate for the use intended, there was a failure to properly warn, and there was a design defect by the scrubber manufacturer. Defendant contested that their product was flammable and argued that plaintiff’s employer had used other chemicals which were flammable and which served as the source of ignition and fire.

The results of every case is dependent upon the specific facts of the case and the results will differ if based on different facts.