On Saturday night at about 10:00 p.m. a limousine caught fire on the San Mateo Bridge in Hayward, leaving five women dead including a recent bride. According to NBC News, there were nine passengers aboard the 1999 Lincoln Town Car limousine when it caught fire.

KTLA news is reporting a horrible accident at a La Canada Sport Chalet store occurred Friday morning at about 10:00 a.m. Apparently, two store employees went into a utility room to check on reports of a gas smell emanating from the room. The employees, one a 27-year-old woman and the other a 30-year-old man, were able to shut off the gas leak but upon leaving the room the gas flashed and the room exploded. The victims suffered second and third degree burns over 50 to 80% of their bodies. It

In a recent decision by the California Supreme Court (Nalwa vs. Cedar Fair (2012) 55 Cal. 4th 1148), it was held that an amusement park has no duty to ensure a rider's safety when that patron assumes the risk of riding a bumper car, even where the plaintiff sustained a broken wrist from a "head-on" collision. The Court's decision was based on a long line of cases arising from sporting activities and in which it has been held the participant has "assumed the risk" inherent in the activity.

On December 11th, ESPN anchor Hannah Storm was reportedly injured in a gas explosion involving her back yard BBQ. According to Yahoo Sports, Storm was injured when trying to re-ignite her propane gas grill. The grill exploded causing bad burns over a large part of her body and face.

A machinist at Disneyland in Anaheim is in the hospital after being struck by a Space Mountain car on October 3, according to the Orange County Register. The 68-year-old employee, whose name was not released, was injured after hours while performing maintenance on the popular ride. He was returning a vehicle which had been repaired to the tracks when the car somehow broke loose and struck him, causing head, chest, and back injuries, according to the state’s Occupational Safety and Health Adm

According to news reports, Bumbo International Trust is recalling about four million of its popular baby seats after at least 50 children reported fell from the seats on elevated surfaces.  The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced the recall on Wednesday and disclosed that nineteen of the infants apparently suffered skull fractures, prompting the company and government agency to urge parents to stop using the product until they obtain a repair kit.  The seats have been sold in the United Stated at Sears, Target, Toys R Us (including Babies R Us), USA Babies, Walmart, and various other online sellers and toy and children's stores nationwide.  The recalled products were sold between August of 2003 and August of 2012, for between $30 and $50.

According to the news report, consumers should not take the seats back to the stores at which they were purchased since they cannot provide the repair kit.  Instead, the buyers can order the free kit from Bumbo's website or can call the company at 866-898-4999 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. (CT) Monday through Thursday and between 8 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. (CT) on Friday.

See the CBS news report and video HERE.

Under California law, in order to prove a product was dangerously designed and that the manufacturer is therefore strictly (automatically) liable for injuries, it must be shown that the product  did not perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would have expected it to perform.  This is called the consumer expectation test, and it consists of the following elements: (1)  The product did not perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would have expected it to perform when used or misused in an intended or reasonably foreseeable way; (2)  The plaintiff in the case was harmed; and (3)  The product's failure to perform safely was a substantial factor in causing the harm.  This test is applied whenever a product does not meet reasonable minimum safety expectations of the ordinary consumer.  No expert testimony need be offered.  It seems obvious in the case above that the ordinary consumer would expect their child to be safe in a seat designed for infants.  Although no restraint was included in the initial design, given the seat's configuration which seems to wrap around the child's legs, most parents would likely think their child was safe from falls.  

Compensation for the victims of dangerously defective products, especially those that injure children, should be an important concern for everyone. When an unsafe product, such as dangerous child seat, causes severe injuries or death, the seller should be held accountable for the injuries and damages they have caused.   An Orange County product liability attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 21 years of experience handling personal injury and product liability cases, including just this type.   He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been injured by an unreasonably dangerous product?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above. This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

 

 

The Federal Trade Commission announced last week that Skechers had agreed to pay a $40,000,000.00 fine for making representations in their advertising that simply were not true.  For many people seeking a healthier lifestyle or trying to lose weight, the advertisements seemed almost too good to be true - wear Skechers Shape-ups footwear and watch the pounds melt away.  According to a CCN story, at a news conference last Wednesday, the FTC said the shoemaker's claims weren't true and alleged Skechers violated federal law by misleading consumers, consisting of "unfounded claims that Shape-ups would help people lose weight, and strengthen and tone their buttocks, legs and abdominal muscles."

See the CNN news story HERE.

Skechers Shape-ups have been touted as being able to:

1. Promote weight loss,
2. Tone muscles,
3. Improve posture,
4. Reduce stress on knees and ankles,
5. Strengthen and firm the back muscles,
6. Tighten abdominal muscles,
7. Improve blood circulation,
8. Firm leg muscles,
9. Tone and firm thigh muscles,
10. Relieve muscle tension and fatigue, and
11. Allow the wearer to get in shape without setting foot in a gym.

Moved by such claims, consumers purchased the Shape-ups with very high expectations, and they sometimes did not only fail to see the results promised, but they were injured as well.  The Shape-ups shoes are actually designed to be unstable, and this makes them potentially dangerous, especially for those with knee or ankle instability issues.  Older consumers , who are prone to falls in general, can be exposed to an even greater risk of falls and serious injuries because of the shoe instability.  In spite of this, Skechers marketed their well-hyped shoes to everyone, including those at a heightened risk for falls.  Those injured because of being misled and never warned, have the right to bring a products liability action to recover compensation for their injuries and damages.

Compensation for the victims of dangerously defective products, including toning shoes like Skechers Shape-ups, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When an unsafe product, such as a pair of toning shoes, causes severe injuries or death, the manufacturer should be held accountable for the injuries and damages they leave behind.  An Orange County products liability attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has 20 years of experience handling personal injury and product liability cases, including just this type.  His office filed the first Orange County lawsuit against Skechers, and he can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been injured by Skechers Shape-ups or some other toning shoes?

• This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

 

 

Reports of tainted restaurant food are splashed in the mass media from time to time and those reports always raise the issue of food safety in this "fast food" world.  Once the problem has been brought to light and remedial action taken, there is again a lack of public interest.  But if you are the victim of tainted food and have been personally injured, you should know your rights and what steps you should take to protect those rights.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, each year, 1 in 6 Americans (or 48 million people) gets sick from and 3,000 die of foodborne diseases.  (See the CDC's official website)  The prevalence of this problem is likely unsettling to anyone reading those numbers.  Putting aside the large scale outbreaks caused by manufacturing or processing negligence, there are often isolated incidents in which a consumer is harmed by tainted food.  For example, there have been reports ranging from large bones being left in a chicken enchilada to a condom being found in clam chowder.  When food is tainted, those selling it to the public may be liable for all of the resulting injuries and damages.

Under California law, if the injury-producing substance is natural to the preparation of the food served, it can be said that it was reasonably expected by its very nature, and the seller may only be liable if negligence in the preparation can be shown.  However, if the injury-causing substance is foreign to the food served, then the seller may be strictly (automatically) liable for the incident.  In those circumstances, the judge or jury will decide whether the substance (1) could be reasonably expected by the average consumer and (2) if it rendered the food unfit or defective.  Because the precise nature of the defect is important in the determination of liability, it is imperative that the victim document the event as best they can, with photographs and by maintaining any uneaten portion of the food.  Additionally, it is important to report the tainted food to the seller and the appropriate health agency as soon as possible.

Compensation for the victims of dangerously defective products, including tainted food, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When an unsafe product, such as dangerous food, causes severe injuries or death, the seller should be held accountable for the injuries and damages they have caused.  An Orange County product liability attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims. Mr. Ralph has 20 years of experience handling personal injury and product liability cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been injured by tainted food?

This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.
  

 

After a tire apparently blew out, an SUV carrying eight passengers rolled several times on the eastbound lanes of Highway 60 in Glen Avon yesterday morning.  Citing official CHP sources, the Press Enterprise reported that the majority of the passengers were not properly seatbelted at the time of accident.  The passengers were apparently coming from Los Angeles and heading to a Fourth of July outing at Lake Perris in Riverside County.  The early investigation showed the vehicle, a Mitsubishi Montero, rolled at about 9:45 a.m. after an apparent tire blowout near Pyrite Street.  The vehicle was reportedly carrying three adults and five children.  Two of the children, ages 6 and 14, were pronounced dead at the scene, and the remaining six victims were transported to local hospitals for treatment of injuries ranging from minor to severe.

See the Press Enterprise story HERE.

This tragic accident is still under investigation by the CHP, and it is far too early to identify a definitive cause.  However, it appears witnesses reported a tire on the Montero blew out before the rollover accident.   Assuming this to be true, it will be important for those investigating the accident to determine whether the blowout resulted from striking an object in the road, a product defect in the tire,  inadequate tire pressure or a combination of some or all of these factors.  Additionally, the driver’s reaction to the sudden deflation of the tire will determine whether human error contributed to the severity of the accident.  Important elements of accident reconstruction and human factors will need to be evaluated in order to best determine how and why this horrific accident occurred.

Compensation for victims of accidents caused by a defective product, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a consumer is injured or killed because of an unsafe product, including a vehicle tire, the manufacturer should be held accountable.  An Orange County product liability lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been injured in an accident involving the failure of a defective product?

• Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above.  This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

A roll-over accident killed two Nevada women yesterday along Interstate 15 in the Mojave Desert town of Baker.  According to the Press Enterprise, citing official sources, the accident happened at approximately 11:30 a.m. in the town located midway between Barstow and Nevada.  The driver of the SUV involved, 37 year-old Claudia Qeuzada, and the rear seat passenger, 20-year-old Blanca Valenzuela, were pronounced dead at the scene, along the interstate’s southbound lanes near Halloran Springs Road.  Other occupants of the vehicle were hospitalized after the crash.  According to witnesses, it appeared that the right rear tire blew, causing the SUV to veer off the roadway and roll multiple times.  The California Highway Patrol is still investigating the precise cause of the accident.

See the Press Enterprise story HERE.

Assuming that the witness reports are correct and the rear tire blew out just before the accident, it could be that this occurred because of a defect in the manufacture or design of the tire.  If there was a tread separation and blow out, then this accident may have caused, at least in part, by a dangerously defect product.  Other causes of a tire blow out include low air pressure which can cause the sidewall to split or striking an object in the roadway, which can lead to a weakened, bubbled area in the sidewall that will eventually fail.  In addition to these factors, the speed of the vehicle and the reaction of the driver must be taken into account.  Given the severity of this accident and the tragic consequences, it is likely the CHP’s Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team (MAIT) will likely due a full investigation, which will include, among other things, a physical evidence analysis and mechanical inspection in order to determine the cause of the accident.

Compensation for victims of accidents caused by a defective product, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a consumer is injured or killed through no fault of his own because of a product defect, the manufacturer should be held accountable.  An Orange County product liability lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been injured in an accident involving the failure of a defective product?

• Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above.  This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

 

Just last week, ABC news reported that Consumer Reports released important information about the claims of health benefits by toning shoe manufacturers.  The television commercials for a variety of toning shoes make it look so easy to get in shape.  However, as more of these shoes are purchased, Consumer Reports medical adviser Dr. Orly Avitzur is hearing more frequently about injuries.  According to the doctor and as reported by ABC news, ”An independent study by the American Council on Exercise found no significant difference between exercising in toning sneakers as compared to regular sneakers.”  Beyond what appears to be inflated claims of health benefits, Consumer Reports Health says if you have any balance or medical problems in your legs and feet, avoid toning shoes.

See the ABC news story HERE and the Consumer Reports article HERE.

According to toning shoe manufacturers, in particular Skechers, these shoes are intended to strengthen muscles, promote weight loss and improve posture.  What the shoe manufacturers and retailers don’t tell consumers is that these shoes are designed to be unstable.  People with weak hips, knees and ankles (especially the elderly) are not warned of the potential for falls or other injuries.  To the contrary, toning shoe manufacturers make no distinction between healthy, active members of the general public and those who are at a heightened risk of injury when wearing toning shoes.  Even after a wealth of information regarding the risks of toning shoes has become available to the manufacturers, companies like Skechers have refused to place warnings on their Shape-ip toning shoes.  The Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph is currently litigating an Orange County lawsuit against Skechers for just this reason.

Compensation for the victims of dangerously defective products, including toning shoes like Skechers Shape-ups, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When an unsafe product, such as a pair of toning shoes, causes severe injuries or death, the manufacturer should be held accountable for the injuries and damages they leave behind.  An Orange County personal injury attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has 20 years of experience handling personal injury and product liability cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been injured by toning shoes?

• This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

Toning shoe manufacturers are currently under fire because of safety concerns.  For example, claims and lawsuits have been filed around the country alleging the Skechers Shape-ups are dangerous and are not the product claimed.  Shape-Ups are marketed to consumers as being able to promote weight loss, tone muscles and improve posture, but a hefty number of consumers are claiming they were actually injured (some very badly) by these shoes. 

In spite of the firestorm of criticism, Skechers began marketing their Shape-Ups to girls as young as 7 years old.   A Skechers television advertising campaign targets pre-teen girls (not boys) in an apparent effort to convince these children they need to get in shape by wearing the Skechers shoes.  But some experts have come forward to criticize this marketing strategy as going way too far.  Earlier this week, the Today Show ran a segment on the controversy. 

See the NBC Today coverage HERE.

As mentioned in an earlier post, the marketing strategy of Skechers and the safety of their Shape-up shoes are the subject of a lawsuit filed last month in Orange County by the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph.  That case, apparently the first of its kind in Orange County, is essentially one for products liability and unfair business practices.  That case arises from a fall that occurred when a consumer was wearing Skechers Shape-ups while descending a flight of stairs.  The fall resulted in a very serious ankle fracture for which surgical repair was required.

Compensation for the victims of dangerously defective products, including toning shoes, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a product is touted as promoting good health, when it is in fact dangerous, the manufacturer and seller should be held accountable for the injuries and damages they cause.  An Orange County injury lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has 20 years of experience handling personal injury and product liability cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been injured by toning shoes?

• This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

Like most of us, you have probably seen a number of ads for Skechers' Shape-ups.  The company touts these toning shoes as being able to improve the wearer's health in a wide range of ways.  From improving posture to reducing fat, the Skechers' Shape-ups are advertised as seemingly one of the best investments a consumer could make in their health.

However, studies which suggest the shoes provide little to no benefit are pouring in.  Critics, including licensed health care professionals, have linked the shoes to an increased risk of injury and falls. One such study by the American Council on Exercise (ACE) was released in July of last year.  According to ACE, all three toning shoes tested (including Skechers' Shape-ups) showed no statistically significant increases in either exercise response or muscle activation during treadmill trials, when compared to the normal athletic shoes tested.  The researchers found there was simply no evidence to indicate that the toning shoes offer any enhanced fitness benefits over traditional sneakers, despite studies cited by manufacturers seemingly “proving” the toning shoes’ effectiveness.  See the study summary at the ACE website.

As indicated in an earlier post, the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph has filed what appears to be Orange County's  first product liability lawsuit against Skechers, as a result of injuries sustained by a Shape-ups wearer.  Since that time, Mr. Ralph has received consumer reports from as far away as Chicago that they have experienced injuries/pain as a result of wearing Shape-ups.  The product liability action here in Orange County will be moving forward in discovery shortly and informative blog posts should follow.

Compensation for the victims of dangerously defective products, including toning shoes, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a product, such as toning shoes, causes severe injuries or chronic medical conditions, the manufacturer should be held accountable for the injuries and damages they cause.  An Orange County injury lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has 20 years of experience handling personal injury and product liability cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been injured by toning shoes?

• This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

SKECHERS Shape-ups, like other toning shoes, have recently come under fire because of safety concerns.  These unstable shoes have reportedly been linked to a number of serious fall accidents, resulting in very severe injuries.  In spite of the inherently unstable design, these shoes are sold by SKECHERS USA, Inc., without any meaningful warning.

Beyond the lack of warning, consumers are enticed to buy these fairly expensive shoes by some rather bold advertising claims.  The ad campaign by SKECHERS includes claims that their Shape-up shoes can:

(1)  Promote weight loss, (2)  Tone muscles, (3)  Improve posture, (4)  Reduce stress on knees and ankles, (5)  Strengthen and firm the back muscles, (6)  Tighten abdominal muscles, (7)  Improve blood circulation, (8)  Firm leg muscles, (9)  Tone and firm thigh muscles, (10)  Relieve muscle tension and fatigue, and (11)   Allow the wearer to get in shape without setting foot in a gym.

Just this week, the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph filed perhaps the first products liability lawsuit in Orange County against SKECHERS because of an accident believed to have been caused by the Shape-up shoes.  In addition to claims for product liability, it is alleged in that case that SKECHERS has engaged in unfair business practices in making essentially unsubstantiated claims regarding the benefits of these shoes and in marketing the Shape-ups to the elderly, without adequate warnings.

Compensation for the victims of dangerously defective products, including toning shoes, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a product, such as toning shoes, causes severe injuries or death, the manufacturer should be held accountable for the injuries and damages they leave behind.  An Orange County injury lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has 20 years of experience handling personal injury and product liability cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been injured by toning shoes?

• This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

At approximately 11:15 p.m. on Tuesday night, a fiery crash along the westbound Artesia (91) Freeway in Buena Park took the life of a driver.  According to news reports citing sources from the California Highway Patrol, a van was reported on fire at 11:18 p.m. on the 91 east of Knott Avenue.  A tree also was reported on fire, and responding engine crews had several lanes of the freeway blocked at one point.  According to official sources, the man was driving in the number 3 lane at about 65 to 70 mph when his 2003 Chevrolet van caught fire.  The driver reportedly swerved to the right off the roadway, hit the shoulder wall, and crashed into a tree.  In spite of the fire department's quick response and dowsing of the flames, the victim, who has not been identified, was pronounced dead at the scene, the CHP said.  The accident remains under investigation, and witnesses are urged to call 714-892-4426 to assist.

See the full story and video at http://www.ocregister.com/news/chp-283767-right-fire.html

While the precise cause of the fire remains to be determined, it is possible the fire (since it apparently began while the driver was simply traveling down the freeway) was caused by a defect in the 2003 Chevrolet van.  Fire within a vehicle's engine compartment does not ordinarily start spontaneously unless there is an unreasonably dangerous defect with the motor vehicle.  A careful mechanical inspection by an expert, perhaps a member of the CHP, may reveal the precise cause. Ordinarily, a vehicle fire of this magnitude erupts from an impact causing the gas tank to explode.  For example, one of the most noteworthy products liability cases in Orange County history involved a 1972 Ford Pinto hatchback automobile which unexpectedly stalled on a freeway, erupting into flames when it was rear ended by a car proceeding in the same direction. Mrs. Lilly Gray, the driver of the Pinto, suffered fatal burns, and 13-year-old Richard Grimshaw, a passenger in the Pinto, suffered severe and permanently disfiguring burns on his face and entire body. Grimshaw and the heirs of Mrs. Gray (Grays) sued Ford Motor Company and others.  Following a very lengthy jury trial, verdicts were returned in favor of plaintiffs against Ford Motor Company.   Grimshaw was awarded $ 2,516,000 compensatory damages and $125 million punitive damages; the Grays were awarded $559,680 in compensatory damages.  The trial court effectively reduced the punitive damage award to $3 1/2 million.  (Grimshaw vs. Ford Motor Company (1981) 119 Cal. App. 3d 757)

Compensation for the victims of dangerously defective products should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a motor vehicle, or other product, causes severe injuries or death, the manufacturer should be held accountable for the injuries, damages and devastation they leave behind.  An Orange County injury lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has nearly 20 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family been injured or killed by a defective product?

• Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above.  This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

The law in California, and that generally around the country, protects consumers injured when a defective product causes harm.  From pressure cookers to tennis shoes, if the manufacturer produces a dangerously defective product then the victim may have a legal remedy.  The liability for dangerously defective products falls not only on the manufacturer,  but also on others who are responsible for the sale and distribution of the item.  The logic behind this is simple:  the manufacturer is in the best position to assess the safety of their products before introducing them to the marketplace.  If the risk of injury is too high, in theory, the manufacturer and others in the stream of commerce will not produce or sell the product because of the related costs associated with injury claims and lawsuits.

 

To prove such a case, the injured party must usually establish: the product  had potential risks that were known or should have been known at the time it was made, the potential risks presented a substantial danger to users, ordinary consumers would not have recognized the potential risks, the manufacturer failed to warn of the danger, the injured party was harmed while using the product in a reasonably foreseeable way and the lack of warning was a cause of harm to the user.  In addition to this theory of liability, known in the law as "strict liability", a consumer may also bring claims for breach of warranty and negligence.

For example, in one case a pressure cooker was advertised as one that "CAN'T EXPLODE".   In spite of this advertisement (actually on the box), a cooker sold by the manufacturer did explode, causing very serious 2nd and 3rd degree burns on the torso and face of the victim.  With such a bold representation about the safety of the cooker, that proved to be untrue, liability was not difficult to establish.  The compensation paid to that victim, injured while her small children were present, was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.  The attempt by the manufacturer to set its product apart from the rest with such a bold safety claim proved to be costly, for both the victim and the company.

Compensation for victims of dangerously defective products should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a manufacturer or seller of such a product causes harm to a consumer, they should be held accountable.  An Orange County trial lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 19 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Does the California law imposing liability on manufacturers and others who sell or distribute defective products make sense?

• This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.