Law Office of Carl A. Secola, Jr., LLC

products liability Archives

Foreign objects in Spam could lead to products liability claims

Many people utilize prepackaged foods as part of their meals. Some Connecticut residents may simply enjoy the taste of certain items, and others may appreciate the ease that these products can provide. However, issues could arise with certain foods that leave consumers facing injury and companies facing products liability claims.

Products liability: Honeywell issues hard hat recall

Individuals in various industries utilize tools to help keep them safe and to help them carry out their work-related duties. When equipment does not function properly, the risk for workplace injuries could increase. If a worker does become injured due to a defective product, they may have reason to explore various options for seeking compensation, including products liability claims.

Recall of pacifier holders may prompt products liability claims

After having a child, many parents feel that their senses of worry increase considerably. As a result, they often want to ensure that anything they give their children does not pose any unnecessary hazards to their safety. Unfortunately, some products may pose risks that are not obvious, and children could potentially suffer harm. In cases when a defective item results in injury, parents may have reason to file products liability claims.

Products liability: Strollers still on market despite injuries

Using any type of product could come with certain hazards. Generally, with proper use, most products do not pose a significant risk of harm to consumers. However, if a product has a defect or other issue that leads to injuries to individuals who use the item, the company that makes the product may need to address the issue. Additionally, parties who have been harmed may have reason to file products liability claims.

Products liability: Crib mattresses recalled due to fire hazard

Parents of young children often want to do whatever they can to protect their kids. This desire typically leads Connecticut parents to use child-safe products in hopes of avoiding any unfortunate accidents that could involve their children. However, some issues with certain products may not become known until after distribution, and if injuries occur, parents may have reason to file products liability claims.

Hoverboard fire risk may lead to products liability claims

When a product poses a safety risk, consumers need to know about that risk as soon as possible. Additionally, they need to know what type of problem the safety hazard could present and if there is a chance that injuries or other damage could occur. Unfortunately, many products could have defects or other issues that may harm users, and as a result, products liability claims may be warranted.

Undisclosed allergen could lead to products liability claims

Having a serious food allergy can often leave individuals on high alert when it comes to what they eat. Most Connecticut residents know that nut allergies can have serious or even fatal results in the event that a person accidentally ingests a nut. Because of these potential outcomes, correct labeling on food products is vital. If a product is improperly labeled and a person suffers as a result, a products liability claim may be warranted.

Products liability: Transmission issue leads to John Deere recall

Many Connecticut residents use a variety of products during their daily lives, likely without considering potential hazards of those products. In many cases, not taking such considerations does not lead to any significant outcome, but unfortunately, some products could malfunction or otherwise pose an unexpected hazard that could cause serious harm. If such a situation comes about, individuals may have reason to file products liability claims.

Verdicts & Settlements

Jura v Denegris / Bicyclist injured in collision with motor vehicle; a New Britain jury awarded the plaintiff $3,091,700.00 Less 10%. for comparative negligence reducing the net verdict to $2,782,530.00. The highest offer made by the defendants prior to the verdict was in $50,000. 00

see more verdicts