TOY DEFECTS


Ohio Product Liability Lawyer reviewing cases and lawsuits for injured clients and plaintiffs nationwide
Nationwide Success

Recover from Your Injuries

Spread Awareness for Faulty Products

Each year in the United States, hundreds of defective children’s products injure babies and children, and child product recalls are initiated. For many consumers, the recalls come too late, and only after serious accidents and injuries have occurred.

The Consumer Protection Safety Commission (CPSC) is tasked with regulating new products on the market, many of which are designed for children and babies. The safety agency works closely with manufacturers and issues safety recalls when injuries and accidents are reported.

The CPSC, however, can only act after the fact in many cases, and although they have been criticized for not preventing numerous accidents related to defective children’s products, the onus is on the manufacturer of child products to produce and market safe products for American consumers.

Many toys and defective products on the market present choking hazards for young children. Cheap and defective products may break into small pieces, and window cords, playground equipment, jewelry, or clothing create strangulation and choking risks.

The manufacturers of children’s products have a duty to foresee potential injury and properly design and test products before they are released to the public. Companies must also properly warn consumers of any risks associated with their products. Any failure to protect consumers that results in accidents and injury can lead to lawsuits filed by plaintiffs and their child injury lawyer.

Compensation following child injury accidents are likely for plaintiffs. Companies are likely to settle, and try to avoid bad press and a public trial. Financial compensation may not completely help in the haling process following an accident, but holding negligent companies responsible can force them to provide safer products in the future to prevent further accidents.

A product may be defective if any of the following statements are true:

  • The product has a dangerous design
  • The product is toxic
  • The product does not function as intended or advertised
  • The product is missing safety components
  • The product has been made with cheap, inferior materials
  • The product is poorly constructed or assembled
  • The product has hidden or unreadable warning labels and instructions

    Defective Toys


According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), in 2016 there were an estimated 240,000 toy-related injuries treated in U.S. hospital emergency departments.

The CPSC is the primary federal safety agency responsible for making regulations for the sale and manufacture of consumer products, which includes numerous children-related products and toys. The agency is tasked with protecting children from injuries caused by defective products that pose a health or safety risk.

Each year, the CPSC releases an annual safety and recall report that describes specific toy-related injuries in the United States. Injuries involve minor cuts, bruises, or scratches, and also serious injuries and deaths that result from very dangerous products released on the market. The majority of injuries to children are typically twelve years-old or younger.

The toys associated with the largest number of injuries, according to the CPSC, are non-motorized scooters. Scooters and riding toys represented the largest number of incidents during the last year. Other toys that frequently injure children include balls, dolls, toy guns, water slides and inflatable toys.

Joe Lyon is a highly-rated Cincinnati, Ohio Product Liability Lawyer representing plaintiffs nationwide in a wide variety of consumer product liability and toy defect cases. 


Defective Toys & Child Safety Risks


Choking & Strangulation Hazards


Choking and strangulation hazards are some of the leading causes of child injury and death related to defective children’s products. Objects like balloons, small balls, magnets, marbles, detachable toy parts and art supplies present a serious danger.

Because many children place objects in their mouth, the CPSC has passed the Child Safety Protection Act which bans products with small parts for children under the age of three. Child product and toy companies are meant to test their products against the safety standard to determine any strangulation or choking hazard. Warnings are required if there is any doubt of safety.

Children are at risk of strangulation by cords, strings or ropes. Window blind cords, for example, are a severe child hazard. Breathing difficulties and asphyxiation can result in a short amount of time. Playground equipment and other furniture can present other chocking and strangulation risks.


Child Injury Lawsuits & Wrongful Deaths



Toxic Toys & Lead Poisoning


Lead toxicity can result from a child placing a contaminated product in their mouth. Very young kids and infants are usually the most vulnerable to oral poisoning accidents. Children can exposed to a large dose of lead, or through long-term exposure. Lead can accumulate in the blood over a period of months to years.

Symptoms of lead toxicity may be mild, and can appear long after initial toxic exposure. Lead injuries all depend on the level and duration of exposure and ingestion. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), around 250,000 children in the U.S. under the age of 5 years old have elevated levels of lead in their system.

Toxic ingestion is a rather common issue for young kids, and even parents are unaware sometimes that child products could contain dangerous chemicals. Lead poisoning is still a problem, even though it is thought to be an age-old safety hazard. Many toys are recalled in the U.S., generally when toys manufactured outside the country are not tested before they are sold to the public.

Other hazardous chemicals may be in child products, and can cause adverse health effects. Some toxins are added to plastics in toys and other infant products. Plastic products that have contained chemicals include teething rings and pacifiers, rattlers and other toys. Children will often place any object in their mouth, whether intended or not, and it is crucial that children’s products are free of toxins.


Dangerous Consumer Products


In the past, some of the most notable and worst toy defects that presented safety hazards included the following:

  • Easy Bake Oven—in 2007, there were 29 reports of children injuring their hands, which got caught in the product and suffered burns. Hasbro recalled almost one million ovens.
  • Inflatable Baby Floats—products were recalled after it was reported that the leg straps of the float’s seat were susceptible to tearing, posing a serious drowning risk. About four million units were recalled.
  • Yoyo Balls—presented strangulation risks and there were 17 reports of kids of suffering injuries with the cord wrapped around their neck.
  • Hang 10 Mini Hammock—the mini hammocks risked kids getting tangled up or strangled in the hammocks. Thousands of products were recalled.
  • Sky Dancers Flying Dolls—this toy was known to cause face and head injuries, as reported by around 150 customers.
  • CSI Fingerprint Examination Kit—the dusting powder in the kit was found to have elements of asbestos, a mineral known to cause cancer.
  • Barbie Dolls—in 2009, Mattel recalled China-manufactured Barbie dolls due to lead paint content.
  • In 2007, Mattel recalled 21 million toys in a span of five weeks, many because of excessive levels of lead paint.

Child Accident Prevention


It is always a priority to keep kids safe by all means. It is prudent to follow CPSC child product recall lists, and make sure you do not already own defective children’s products. It is important to try to remember the following in order to minimize the risk of child injuries:

  • Buy only flame-resistant child fabrics
  • Monitor toy recalls
  • Look out for toys with small, detachable parts
  • Look for sharp edges
  • Read child product manuals and instructions carefully
  • Buy all non-toxic paints and art supplies
  • Follow age restrictions and warnings
  • Never leave children unattended
  • Report any unsafe child products to the CPSC

Defective Toy Recall Lawsuits


  1. Kids II recalled 680,000 Oball Rattles in March 2017 due to a choking hazard. The plastic discs on the outside of the rattle can break and release small plastic beads. At least 42 incidents were reported.
  2. Britax recalled 676,000 strollers because a defective receiver caused the car seat to fall unexpectedly in at least 33 incidents that resulted in at least 26 injuries.
  3. Little Tikes recalled 540,000 2-in-1 Snug ‘n Secure Pink toddler swings after 140 incidents caused 39 injuries. The swings can crack and break while in use, causing a child to experience a fall.
  4. Moose Toys recalled 427,000 Little Live Pets in February 2017 due to chemical and injury hazards. When the button batteries are removed, the battery’s toxic chemicals can leak. Seventeen incidents have been reported.
  5. Razor recalled 158,000 RipStiks Motorized Caster Boards after 700 incidents were reported. The caster boards, also known as vigorboards, were faulty and the rear wheel can lock while in use, posing a fall hazard.
  6. Dynacraft recalled 20,000 Surge and Tonka battery operated ride-on toys because the acceleration pedal can get stuck, causing accidents and falls.
  7. R. Smith recalled 800 Helix Pool Slides after at least 15 related injuries were reported. The sides of the slide are too low, and children can fall off before they reach the water. This can result in serious injury, particularly if they fall onto hard surfaces.

Defective Toy Product Injury


If your child has been injured due to interaction with particular defective toys, it is critical to preserve the evidence with photographs and all product parts. Take photos at the scene and contact an injury lawyer as soon as possible.

An experienced product liability lawyer has the ability to hire experts in design and evaluate the cause of the injury. To build a strong case, there must be evidence that the design or material of a toy is defective, a manufacturing defect existed, or the manufacturer was negligent in marketing or testing methods.

Compensation may be available for past and future medical costs, pain and suffering, lost wages, as well as punitive damages against a toy manufacturer for disregarding the safety of children and consumers. Manufacturers and distributors of goods can be held liable for any physical harm or property damage caused by their products.

photo of attorney Joe Lyon
A Voice for Those who have suffered

Why are these cases important?

Many product liability cases have had a positive impact on public health and safety, and we have witnessed improved lives and future injuries prevented as companies are forced to remove products and change designs and warnings as a result of litigation.

Give Yourself a Voice

icon-published

Get Justice

Gain Recovery

Generate Awareness

Questions about Product Liability & Case Types

What is a Product Liability Lawsuit?

Product liability lawsuits often contain causes of action for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. Strict liability applies to different factors than negligence-based claims.

In negligence cases, the actions of the defendant are the focus. In strict liability claims, the focus is on the condition of a product at the time it left the manufacturer. If a product is determined to be defective, the company is liable for any foreseeable injuries that are in-part caused by the defective condition of the product.

What are some examples of Product Liability?
How is a Product Defined as Defective?
Ohio Definition of Defective

A product is defective if it is unreasonably dangerous for its intended use. A legal cause of action can be based on several types of product defects. The following are Cincinnati product liability and strict liability claims available in Ohio and in most jurisdictions nationwide:

(1)  Manufacturing/ Construction Defect:

These issues arise where the product is released from the factory in a manner that deviates from the intended design or specifications. The defect can be a result of using the wrong materials, including the wrong or completely foreign materials (e.g., Tylenol contamination, food poisoning, damaged car part from factory installation).

As a result of the deviation, the product enters the market in an unreasonably dangerous condition and the consumer is exposed to or purchases a product that is defective. Any personal injuries or economic loss that arise from the the defect are compensable under Ohio product liability law.

(2) Defective design and/or formulation:

Defective design product liability cases arise not because a mistake was made during the manufacturing process, but rather the original design of the product is unreasonably dangerous. A “risk benefit analysis” is used to determine whether safer/less expensive alternative designs were available to the manufacturer.

Federal regulations set minimum standards for the design of many consumer products, and preemption defenses may preclude liability in some situations if the manufacturer follows and obtains federal approval for a product. Automotive recalls and product liability cases are usually a result of a defective design. Common cases include the Toyota Brake Recall, Chrysler Gen III seat belt buckle, lap belt only cases, Metal on Metal hip implants, transvaginal mesh.)

(3) Failure to warn or inadequate warning or instruction associated with the product:

All consumer products come with necessary and appropriate warnings and instructions for use. If the lack of a warning makes the product and use of the product unsafe, the manufacturer is liable for the failure to place the warning. The most common area of litigation for failure to warn is in pharmaceutical litigation.

Pharmaceutical manufacturers are required to warn of the known or foreseeable side effects and update the warnings in a timely manner. Litigation arises where there is evidence the manufacturer failed to timely update a warning in light of new data or simply ignored the risk and failed to conduct sufficient research to identify and then disclose the risk.

(4) Misrepresentation:

The product fails to conform to a representation or warranty. Warranty claims are more common in commercial and economic loss cases than in personal injury cases. In many States, The Product Liability Act does not apply to cases with only economic loss, because the Commercial Code provides recourse for breach of warranty.

The warranty may be written or implied based upon the products intended purpose and merchantability. An example of a breach of warranty cases are cases involving automotive defects.

How do you prove design defects?

Risks:  The following factors are considered under Ohio law when determining the risks associated with the design of a product:  (1) the magnitude of the risk of injury; (2) ordinary consumer awareness of the risk for injury; (3) the likelihood of causing injury; (4) the violation of a private or public standard; and (5) the consumer’s expectation of the performance of the product and level of danger. Ohio Revised Code 2307.5 (B) Product Defective in Design or Formulation.

BenefitsThe following factors are considered under Ohio law when determining the benefits associated with product design: (1) the utility of the product; (2) availability of an alternative design; (3) the magnitude of risks associated with an alternative design. Ohio Revised Code 2307.5 (c)

Defenses for Defective Design(1) a pharmaceutical drug or medical device is not defective by design if it contains an adequate warning of an unavoidably unsafe aspect of the pharmaceutical or medical device; (2) the dangerous aspect is inherent to the product, recognizable, and cannot be eliminated without compromising the product’s usefulness; (3) a lack of a feasible alternative design. 2307.75 (d)(e)(f).

EXAMPLES:

What is a manufacturing defect?
  • A manufacturing defect is based on a defect that occurred during the manufacturing process. Many auto companies have been involved in this kind of product liability lawsuits in recent years, due to defective airbags, software defects, tire failure, and other dangerous manufacturing errors.

    Most manufacturing defect cases are based on a products deviation from the intended specification, formula, performance standards, or design model. In such cases, it may be easy to determine the product did not comply with the intended design.

    The product may be recalled as a specific lot is identified as being non-compliant and defective. A product may be defective in manufacture or construction, materials and assembly, and a manufacturer or distributor may be subject to strict liability, even though it exercised all possible care.  Ohio Revised Code 2307.74.


    Manufacturing Defect Examples:

What is a failure to warn lawsuit?

In determining whether a product is defective due to inadequate warning or instruction, evidence must be presented to prove:

  • The manufacturer knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known about a risk
  • A reasonable manufacturer would have provided a warning of the risk
  • The manufacturer failed to provide the warning
  • The person was injured due to a lack of warning. The same elements apply whether the claim is based on a warning present during the marketing or post-sale warnings.

Defenses to Failure to Warn Claims(1) the risk was open and obvious or a matter of common knowledge; and (2) in cases of a pharmaceutical drug or medical device, the warning was provided to the prescribing physician (“Learned Intermediary Doctrine”).

Many pharmaceutical companies have been targeted in failure to warn lawsuits for either failing to place warnings on medication guides and packaging or failing to properly test their product before putting it to market.


 

What are consumer product safety regulations?

Design and manufacturing defects result in thousands of product recalls each year in the United States, initiated by federal safety agencies. Following injury and illness, regardless of recall status, victims and plaintiffs may pursue legal action and contact a product liability lawyer to begin the litigation process. Rightful compensation can be sought and help plaintiffs recover medical costs and other related damages.

Product liability law overlaps with regulatory law, which are the systems of legislative rules and administrative agencies, and part of federal and state governments. These agencies regulate the safety of the products sold to the public. Examples include:

  • The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
  • The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA;)
  • The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)

The listed government agencies, however, may initiate recalls of dangerous products but do not provide remedies or compensation for damages where an individual is injured due to the defective product.

Why should I hire The Lyon Firm?

Our Firm will help you find the answers.  The Firm has the experience, resources and dedication to take on difficult and emotional cases and help our clients obtain the justice for the wrong they have suffered. 

 Experience:  Joe Lyon is an experienced Cincinnati Product Liability Lawyer. The Lyon Firm has 17 years of experience and success representing individuals and plaintiffs in all fifty states, and in a variety of complex civil litigation matters.   Product Liability lawsuits can be complex and require industry experts to determine the root cause of an accident or injury.  Mr. Lyon has worked with experts nationwide to assist individuals understand why an injury occurred and what can be done to improve their lives in the future. Some cases may go to a jury trial, though many others can be settled out of court.

Resources/Dedication: Mr. Lyon has worked with experts in the fields of accident reconstruction, biomechanics, epidemiology, metallurgy, pharmacology, toxicology, human factors, workplace safety, life care planning, economics, and virtually every medical discipline in successfully representing Plaintiffs across numerous areas of law. The Lyon Firm is dedicated to building the strongest cases possible for clients and their critical interests.

Results:  Mr. Lyon has obtained numerous seven and six figure results in personal injury,  automotive product liability, medical negligence, construction accidents, and auto dealership negligence casesThe cases have involved successfully litigating against some of  the largest companies in the world 

Your Right to Safety

Watch our Video About the Process

Defective products on the market present safety and health hazards for adults and children. Cheap and defective products may pose fire and burn risks; electrocution, strangulation and choking risks; and severe health risks. The manufacturers of consumer products have a duty to foresee potential injury and properly design and test products before they are released.

Companies must also properly warn consumers of any risks associated with their products. Any failure to protect consumers that results in accidents and injury can lead to lawsuits filed by plaintiffs and their Cincinnati product liability lawyer

Our Victories

The Lyon Firm aggressively, professionally, and passionately advocates for injured individuals and families against companies due to a defective product or recalled product to obtain just compensation under the law.

DEFECTIVE LAP BELT RESTRAINT

SPINAL CORD INJURY

(Pikeville, Kentucky): Confidential settlement for Plaintiff who suffered spinal cord injury resulting in paraplegia due to defectively designed seat belt. Four passengers with three-point (lap/shoulder) belts walked away from the accident, and the only passenger wearing a two-point belt (lap only) suffered a debilitating spinal cord injury. The settlement assisted with home improvements to assist in daily living. GM entered federal bankruptcy during the process and no longer manufactures two-point lap belts for vehicles.

DEFECTIVE PROPANE WALL HEATER

WRONGFUL DEATH 

(Hillsboro, Ohio): Confidential Settlement for the family of elderly man who was catastrophically burned while operating a propane wall heater. The burns resulted in his unfortunate death. The heater, manufactured and sourced from China, was alleged to allow the flame to reach outside the grid area in violation of ANSI standards. The Defendant resolved the case following discovery and mediation. The recovered funds were paid to the victim’s surviving spouse and children. The company no longer manufactures this type of heater.

Request A Free Consultation

 

    • Answer a few general questions.
    • A member of our legal team will review your case.
    • We will determine, together with you, what makes sense for the next step for you and your family to take.
powered by Typeform

© 2020 The Lyon Firm. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED