Plaintiffs allege defendant had prior knowledge that flame could be invisible
Plaintiff, a 42-year-old married, middle school teacher, suffered severe burns over 21 percent of her body when a friend attempted to relight a citronella fire pot by pouring defendant’s fuel gel onto a smoldering flame.
As the refueling began, the fuel gel burst into flames and exploded onto Wilk, who was standing a few feet away.
Plaintiffs alleged that prior to this incident, defendant had been made aware that the burning flame may be invisible and that the fuel’s vapors could travel quickly to ignition sources. This, coupled with the design of the firepot, which plaintiffs alleged made the flame difficult — or, in some cases, impossible — to see, created an unreasonable danger to consumers.
Plaintiffs’ counsel said that the key to resolving this case was positioning themselves in the midst of a declaratory judgment action filed in the Washtenaw County Circuit Court, wherein it was alleged that defendant’s insurance and excess carrier policy limits could be far greater than what had been claimed.
Type of action: Product liability
Type of injuries: Second- and third-degree burns to hands, arms, chest, neck and face
Court/Case no./Date: Gratiot County Circuit Court; 12-11739; Feb. 4, 2013
Are you in need of a product liability and personal injury lawyer?
No comments:
Post a Comment