Defective Products Attorneys Secure $40 Million Verdict for Victim’s Family

new jersey philadelphia defective products attorneys kia motors tiffany stablerDefective products attorneys work to serve two groups of people: their immediate clients who have been injured and are in need of compensation, and the public at large, who are put into harm’s way with a defective product.

Recently, in Alabama, a verdict was found against KIA Motors for the death of 16 year old Tiffany Stabler, who was tragically killed after being ejected from her KIA as a result of a collision. Tiffany’s father purchased the car as a gift, and took it to the dealership to make sure everything was in working order. If the recall had been issued in time, Tiffany would still be alive today.

In 2002, KIA recalled nearly 190,000 vehicles from 1995-1998 for defective seat belts, which made a latch noise, but never closed. However, this recall was a month too late for Tiffany, who was killed before the recall was issued. The family’s defective products attorneys were able to secure a sizable judgment for the family, which they most certainly deserve.

How Defective Products Attorneys Help the Public

The Stabler family’s defective products attorneys assisted the Stabler family in receiving compensation, for sure. But they have also helped the public at large, by winning a judgment that will surely make KIA Motors re-think it’s business practices in order to make cars safer for consumers. When a product is defective, defective product attorneys are an important part of the system to insure that market forces mandate a change in the manufacturing of that product. Changing dangerous products is beneficial to everyone as a whole.

Defective Products Attorneys of New Jersey and Philadelphia

If you or your family members have been injured by a defective product, it is important to act quickly to protect your legal rights. Our experienced professionals are available to assist you in getting the compensation you and your family deserve. Contact the Mininno Law Office for a free case evaluation or call for a free consultation at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey, or (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia.

Products Liability at McDonald’s

products liability defective products new jersey philadelphia attorneyWe’ve all heard about Liebeck v. McDonald’s, more commonly known as the “McDonald’s Coffee Case” of 1994. It was a products liability case that became, as ABC News called it, the “poster child of excessive lawsuits.” It’s easy, without knowing the facts of the case, to scoff at someone who would sue for being burnt by hot coffee.
Coffee is coffee, it’s supposed to be hot! But, is it supposed to be hot enough to cause third degree burns?

Stella Liebeck was 79 when she was in the passenger seat of her Ford Probe, as her grandson drove her through the drive thru of a Mcdonald’s Fast Food Restaurant in New Mexico. He pulled the car over so that Stella could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Stella put the cup between her knees and lifted the lid slightly. At that point, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap. Her cotton sweatpants absorbed the coffee, holding it to her skin for over a minute and a half.
The coffee scalded her thighs, buttocks, and groin. At the hospital, it was determined that she had sustained third degree burns on 6% of her skin, and lesser burns on 16% of her skin. She remained in the hospital for 8 days and underwent skin grafting. In that time she lost 20% of her body weight, reducing her weight to 83 pounds, and causing an additional 2 years of treatment.

Liebeck sought to settle for $20,000 to cover her medical bills, which amounted to $11,000. McDonald’s offered $800. After McDonald’s refused her offer, Liebeck retained attorney Morgan Reed, who brought a case against McDonald’s, accusing them of “gross negligence” in making a product that was “unreasonably dangerous” and “defectively manufactured.
Reed made a settlement offer of $90,000, which McDonald’s rejected. He made another offer of $300,000, followed by a mediator suggested offer of $225,000. McDonald’s rejected both of them, and the case went to trial.

In trial, Reed exposed that McDonald’s was serving coffee at temperatures of 180-190 degrees Farenheight. At this temperature, the coffee could cause third degree burns in 2-7 seconds. Reed also revealed during litigation that between 1982 and 1992, McDonald’s received over 700 reports of people being burned by coffee, and had settled claims for scalding injuries for over $500,000.
In the end, Liebeck was awarded just under $600,000 in punitive and compensatory damages.

Tort Reformists call this a “frivolous” lawsuit, and claim that it’s cases like this that are stressing the economy. But a case like this is far from frivolous. McDonald’s was serving coffee that had the potential to truly harm their customers. As we can see, it did. No labeled warning can replace a manufacturer’s responsibility to keep consumer safety a number one priority.

Product Liability Attorneys at the Mininno Law Office

Nowadays, we see more and more fault in our system regarding foreign manufacturers and their seeming exemption from U.S. regulations on product liability. But even native manufacturers are producing products that are defective and unsafe. Defective products are dangerous, and potentially harmful or fatal.

If you have been injured by a defective product, you may be entitle to compensation. Contact the Mininno Law Office for a free case evaluation, or call us for a free consultation at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey, or (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia.

CT Scans Causing Radiation Overdoses

new jersey philadelphia attorneys medical malpractice product liability ct scans radiation overdoses
CT scanners are using unnecessarily high levels of radiation in brain perfusion scans, and causing hairloss, burns, scabs, and other worse complications.
This past Sunday, The New York Times published a story on CT Scans and the damage they may be causing to patients. It seems the scanners are emitting dangerous and harmful levels of radiation when patients are getting CT brain perfusion scans, a scan often used to test for strokes. This particular test is exposing patients to radiation overdoses at levels that can cause burns, scabs, significant hair loss, cancer, or even brain damage.

Last summer, after a large number of radiation overdoses began emerging, the FDA set off an investigation into why patients were being bombarded with excess radiation. They have yet to publish findings.

The New York Times investigation found that , nationwide, upwards of 400 patients received radiation overdoses in only 8 hospitals. Six of those hospitals are located in California. A health official in California believes that more cases will undoubtedly surface once other states begin to look into the issue. The Times determined that it is relatively unclear why the overdoses are taking place.
Blame could fall on the shoulders of the technicians, who are not properly using the equipment, or the manufacturers of the equipment, who provide poor design and inadequate training. GE Healthcare, one manufacturer of the scanner, suggests to technicians higher levels of radiation for clearer images, a practice that one expert said is unjustified and potentially dangerous.

Affected By a Radiation Overdose? Contact the Mininno Law Office

Depending on what further investigation determines is the catalyst for these radiation overdoses, victims could potentially file medical malpractice or product liabilty claims.
Radiation is a dangerous technology that must be handled with extreme care. Four hundred patients in 8 hospitals suffering from excessive radiation levels is proposterous.

If you or a loved believe you are suffering from the effects of a radiation overdose, contact the Mininno Law Office. Our New Jersey medical malpractice and defective product attorneys will help in any way possible to determine if you have a case. Contact the Mininno Law Office for a free case evaluation, or call us for a free consultation at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey, or (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia.
Let us help you get the compensation you deserve.

Defective Baby Recliner Recalled By CPSC

On Monday, July 26, 2010, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Baby Matters, LLC of Berwyn, PA, recalled 30,000 Nap Nanny portable baby recliners. The recall comes after reports surfaced of infants being found hanging over the side of the defective recliner, still harnessed in. The device poses entrapment, suffocation, and fall hazards.The CPSC is currently investigating the report of a 4 month old baby girl in Michigan who died in a Nap Nanny that was being used in a crib. She was found hanging over the side of the recliner, even though she was harnessed in, caught between the Nap Nanny and the crib bumper. If you are looking for a new recliner then check out these popular recliner brands.

The Nap Nanny instructions do not reccommend using the product in cribs or confined spaces, or on tables or counter tops. But the harnesses do not seem to be keeping infants in place while in the Nap Nanny. This situation worsens when velcro straps located underneath the Nap Nanny cover are not properly attached to the “D” rings.

Click to see the CPSC’s full report on the defective product.

nap nanny defective products consumer safety mininno law office
The Nap Nanny poses entrapment and suffocation threats, even while infants are still harnessed in.

Have You Been Negatively Affected by a Defective Product?

If you or a loved one have been injured by a defective product, you must act quickly. A Defective Product or Product Liability Attorney in New Jersey will help determine whether or not your are entitled to compensation. Contact the Mininno Law Office for a free case evaluation, or call us at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey, or (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia. Let the Civil Trial Attorneys at the Mininno Law Office help you.

NUVARING Named in Product Liability and Wrongful Death Lawsuits

attorneys new jersey wrongful death nuvaring product liabilty
NUVARING causes potentially life threatening complications including bloodclot, stroke, pulmonary embolism, and deep vein thrombosis.
NUVARING is a transparent, flexible, vaginal ring that provides month long birth control by emitting a continuous dose of estrogen and progestin for 21 days. The device releases a combination of ethinyl estradiol, a form of the hormone estrogen, and etonogestral. These substances are supposed to prevent ovulation as well as minimize any sperm penetration, thereby preventing unwanted pregnancies. It gained FDA approval in 2001.

NUVARING is marketed as providing the same efficacy as birth control pills but with the convenience of month-long protection. To a woman who wants the benefits of birth control but not the trouble of remembering to take a pill every day, NUVARING sounds great. Unfortunately, NUVARING has provided more than month long contraception.

Numerous lawsuits are being filed against pharmaceutical companies that marketed or manufactured the product at one time. Suits claim that the manufactureres of NUVARING not only knew about the potential side effects related to the use of NUVARING, including increased risk of stroke, heart attack, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and sudden death, but failed to reveal them to women, or the FDA during the approval process. Some 300 product liability lawsuits are being filed, stating that NUVARING caused plaintiffs to suffer from serious, life threatening blood clots. Wrongful Death suits in New Jersey and Nebraska are pending.

Are You A NUVARING user?

If you currently use NUVARING as a contraceptive, seek medical attention immediately. If you are suffering from complications due to NUVARING, seek the help of a product liability attorney. New Jersey product liability attorneys at the Mininno Law Office are here to answer any questions you have, and to offer a free case evaluation.

Contact the Mininno Law Office or call for a free consultation at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey, or (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia.
Let the attorneys at the Mininno Law Office help you get the compensation you deserve.

BP and Transocean Could Escape Sufficient Liabilty

BP's liability diminished by current laws of the high seasTransocean product liability costs in questionGordon Jones, a 28 year old engineer, was killed in the blast on the Transocean rig, Deepwater Horizon, that caused the horrendous BP oil-spill . Jones left behind a widow, a toddler, and an infant.

Who Will Pay for Deadly Defects?

Unfortunately, laws that are currently in place could prove very detrimental to recovery attempts made by Jones’ family, as well as other injured victims on the rig. The Death on the High Seas Act
(DOHSA), one of the reasons payouts may be insufficient, was ammended in 2000 to help victims of TWA flight 800, but those protections were not also applied to those killed on vessels like the Deepwater Horizon. BP’s liability is, at this time, very limited, because of the DOHSA. Also limiting the liability of BP and Transocean are the Oil Pollution Act (OPA), and the Limitation of Liability Act (LOLA).

The OPA caps BP’s liability at 75 million dollars. That amount won’t even scrape the surface of the cost to Gulf Coast homeowners and businessowners. Transocean is using LOLA to limit their liability costs to just 27 million, as LOLA allows them to claim only responsibility for their destroyed rig. The law was passed in 1851 to protect owners who did not have control of their own vessels, but seems irrelevant today, when insurance and communication are no longer a problem.

President of the American Association for Justice, Anthony Tarricone, had this to say about the situation surrounding BP and Transocean’s liability:“Unless these laws are amended, BP can look forward to significant immunity, while the families of the workers killed and injured by the original explosion, as well as shrimpers, oystermen, fishermen, hotels, and restaurants, will face an uphill battle for justice.”

Has a Defective Product Affected You?

We here at the Mininno Law Office are grealty troubled by the effects of the oil spill on the gulf coast, it’s wildlife, and the surrounding homes, and places of business. That is why we firmly believe that BP and Transocean should not be able to make it out of this without compsenating correctly those who have been affected. If you have been affected by any sort of defective product, the attorneys at the Mininno Law Office are here to help. Manufacturers must always be held liable for their products. Contact us for a free case evaluation, or call us at 856-833-0600 in New Jersey, or 215-567-2380 in Philadelphia.