Cancer mesothelioma settlement

Products liability

ATLA's Products Liability Law Reporter includes a broad range of products liability cases. Here are examples of the kinds of cases appearing in each issue of PLLR.

Defendant may be liable for fraudulent inducement to settle based on fraud committed in prior litigation

The Supreme Court of Hawaii held (1) a party is not immune from liability based on fraud committed during prior litigation and (2) in an action for fraudulent inducement where plaintiffs' attorneys have accused defendant of fraud during prior litigation, plaintiffs are not precluded from establishing that their reliance on defendant's representations was reasonable. Plaintiffs' counsel included Stephen T. Cox, San Francisco, CaL; *Carl H. Osaki, Honolulu, Haw.; Kris A. LaGuire, Hilo, Haw.; and *A. Camden Lewis, Columbia, S.C.

Matsuura v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 73 P.3d 687 (Haw. 2003).

Manufacturer may be liable based on product demonstration that disregarded safety warnings

A New Jersey appellate court held a manufacturer could be liable for injuries caused by a sales representative's demonstration of a personal watercraft where the demonstration undermined the product's warnings. Plaintiff was represented by Jay L. Hundertmark, Northfield, N.J., and James R. Ozol, Toms River, NJ.

Levey v. Tamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A., 825 A.2d 554 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2003).

Failure to warn of asbestos in welding rods

Verdict on behalf of a man who developed lung cancer and another man who developed mesothelioma, from which he later died, after both men were exposed to asbestos in the coating of welding rods they used. They sued the companies that had manufactured the rods, alleging they were detective and unreasonably dangerous and defendants had failed to warn of the danger. Plaintiffs were represented by *Robert I. Komitor and Jerome H. Block, both of New York, N.Y.

Gomez v. AC & S Inc., N.Y., New York County Sup. Ct., No. 10503/02, July 16, 2003.

Inadequate warning in service letter about aircraft

Settlements on behalf of a couple who died when the propeller on the Cessna aircraft the husband was piloting disengaged and struck the plane's tail assembly, causing the plane to crash. The plane had previously been involved in a collision in which the propeller had struck a hangar door. The couple's sons sued the company that manufactured the plane's engine and crankshaft, alleging that a service letter defendant sent to plane owners failed to warn that propeller contact under power with any object mandates a complete engine overhaul. Plaintiffs were represented by *Gary C. Robb and *Anita Porte Robb, both of Kansas City, Mo.

Mercer v. Teledyne Continental Motors, Mo., Jackson County Cir. Ct., No. 01CV229274, July 16, 2003.

Negligent rental of tow dolly

Postverdict settlement on behalf of two men who suffered permanent brain injuries while riding in a sportutility vehicle (SUV) that was towing a van on a tow dolly. The dolly began to sway, causing the driver to lose control of the SUV, which left the road and hit an embankment, ejecting the passengers. The driver also suffered a leg injury. The three men and their wives filed suit against the company that had rented the dolly, alleging it had been negligent in renting the dolly rather than requiring rental of a truck. Plaintiffs in this case were represented by Steve Garner and Jeff Bauer, Springfield, Mo., and *Musa K. Farmand, Jacksonville, Fla. Documents in this case are available through the Court Document Sets section in the back of this issue, courtesy of Mr. Farmand.

Hodzic v. U-Haul Int'l, Inc., Fla., Duval County Cir. Ct., No. 2001-02495-CA, Aug. 8, 2003.

Defective design of infant heel warmer

Verdict on behalf of an infant who suffered caustic burns to his right heel after a heel warmer-used to facilitate the drawing of blood-applied by nurses at the hospital ruptured, leaking caustic substances. His guardian filed suit against the manufacturer, alleging, among other claims, that the warmer was defectively designed because it was unnecessarily difficult to activate, increasing the chances of a rupture. Plaintiff in this case was represented by *Robert E. Cartwright Jr., San Francisco, Cal., and * Frank J. D'Amico Jr., New Orleans, La.

Vinet v. Allegiance Healthcare Corp., Cal., San Francisco County Super. Ct, No. 311709, Feb. 13, 2003.

Defective design of bungee cord

Settlement for a man who suffered a detached retina, resulting in permanent blindness in his left eye, when the bungee cord he was using to secure a load in his truck released, rebounded, and struck him in the eye. He filed suit against the manufacturer of the cord, alleging that its design caused the hook to rotate toward its tip and release from the object to which it was attached, causing the cord to rebound and strike the user. Plaintiff also alleged failure to adequately warn. Plaintiff in this case was represented by *Lambert J. Hassinger Jr. and T. Allen Usry, both of New Orleans, La.

Stewart v. Keeper Corp., U.S. Dist. Ct., E.D. La., No. CA 02-0873, May 2003.

Comment: For other cases alleging eye injuries were caused by bungee cords, see Dudley v. Bungee Int'l Mfg. Corp., 76 F.3d 372 (4th Cir. 1996), 38 ATLA L. Rep. 151 (May 1995), and Hahn v. L.C. Indus., 43 ATLA L. Rep. 275 (Sept. 2000). Documents in the Dudley and Hahn cases are available through the Court Document Sets section in the back of this issue, courtesy of plaintiffs' counsel.