Missouri Injury Law Blog

For many, the idea of a child being injured due to a defective or dangerous product is obviously devastating. But sadly, the truth is that there are a number of products - including children's toys, bedding and car seats - that are recalled every year due to safety issues. However, what is truly frightening is that many parents may never even hear of the recall and then continue to use the dangerous product.

About 40% of recalls last year, or 121 of 310 overall, involved children's products, according to a recent study titled "Kids In Danger." The same study notes two recalls of bunk beds and infant video monitors involved deaths. The Consumer Product Safety Commission's (CPSC) complaint database includes many reports of children injured or killed by recalled products, says Kids In Danger's Nancy Cowles.

According to the recently released Kids in Danger report, there was actually a decline in the number of recalls in 2011. However, even though there was a 24 percent decrease, injuries and other negative incidents actually rose 7 percent last year.

It turns out that part of the problem is most likely due to the fact that when a recall is announced, only between 15 percent and 30 percent of the products are actually sent back or fixed. Of course, there are some rather larger higher-profile recalls that make the news and end up having a larger send back rate, but many smaller recalls do not end up getting as much attention.

Additionally, it seems part of the problem is that when there is a recall, stores have a hard time always tracking down the purchaser to let them known about. Disturbingly the average recall response rate for child safety seats is only about 41%, while about 75% of owners of cars and light trucks take their cars back for recalls, says data and analysis firm Lindsey Research Services. Car recalls are bolstered by mandatory registration while retail recalls suffer from not being able to locate shoppers. The ability to find someone depends on whether they paid with a card or whether they have a customer loyalty account. Online retailers often have the easiest time contacting consumers.

Members of loyalty programs at Toys R Us and Babies R Us get e-mail alerts about product recalls; others can sign up on the stores' websites to get notices. Amazon and Costco notify customers when products they buy online are recalled. Those not members of such programs can take action and sign up for recall notices on CPSC's and NHTSAs websites.

If you or someone you know has been injured because of a company's failure to provide a safe and healthy consumer product, you need the help of a St. Louis products liability attorney experienced and ready to help protect your rights and recover damages for your injury. Contact products liability attorney Ben Sansone today for a free initial consultation at (314) 863-0500.

Source: "Recalls of unsafe kids products down but often ignored," by Jayne O'Donnell, published at USAToday.com.

See Our Related Blog Posts:
Lead in Lipstick Could Lead to Liability
Death of Missouri Newborn Raises Formula Fear

A recently released Food and Drug Administration study has found that measureable amounts of lead exist in many popular brands of lipstick. In total, the FDA found 400 lipsticks on the market that tested positive for lead. Of the brands tested, the least contaminated lipstick was Wet 'n' Wild Mega Mixers Lip Balm Bahama Mama.

On the opposite end of the spectrum were Five L'Oréal and Maybelline lipsticks which ranked among the most contaminated with lead. Maybelline's Color Sensational Pink Petal lipstick had the most lead of all those tested, 7.19 parts per million. The L'Oreal lipstick contained about 7.0 ppm. Additionally, several other popular brands of lipsticks were also found to have high lead content levels. For instance, the Cover Girl and Nars lipsticks were found to contain lead levels close to the 5 ppm. The Cover Girl lipstick measured at 4.92, while Nars measured at 4.93. Other brands tested in the report include Cover Girl, Revlon, Estée Lauder, M.A.C., Burt's Bees and Almay.

Though the FDA has said that the amount of lead should be safe for consumers, other states have more strict requirements. For instance, California limits lead to a maximum 5 ppm, meaning several lipsticks tested exceed the threshold in that state for lead exposure. The FDA regulates cosmetic safety under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Cosmetics must "be safe when used as directed in the labeling or under customary conditions of use." However, cosmetics companies do not have to gain premarket approval for their products. The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has begun a drive to pressure the FDA to regulate lipsticks and other consumer cosmetic products more carefully, insisting that danger is possible.

Concerns about the amount of lead in products like lipstick, which are easily ingested, have been around for a while now, but the Food and Drug Administration has not seemed unduly concerned. The agency says that it is not too worried about contamination from lipsticks, because little of the lipstick is actually ingested.

In these lipsticks, lead is not used as an ingredient, but is considered an impurity. Lead is a chemical compound found naturally in the air, water, and natural environment. St. Louis personal injury lawyers are aware of the many side effects and complications arising from lead exposure contamination. For instance, lead exposure in pregnant women can lead to delays in neurological development, hampering overall fetal development.

The cosmetic industry has no set standards about the kind of chemicals that can be used in their products, and companies generally depend on their own research to determine which ingredients are safe for consumers. If you think you may be sick or injured because of a company's failure to provide a safe and healthy consumer product, you need the help of a St. Louis products liability attorney experienced and ready to help protect your rights and recover damages for your injury. Contact products liability attorney Ben Sansone today for a free initial consultation at (314) 863-0500.

Source: "Lead found in 400 lipsticks, according to report by Food and Drug Administration," published at NYDailyNews.com.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Death of Missouri Newborn Raises Formula Fear

Missouri Personal Injury Lawsuit - Broken Chair at Hotel Collapsed and Caused Severe Back Injury

According to a recent article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Missouri health officials are anxiously awaiting word regarding tests on a batch of powdered infant formula that was recently removed from Wal-Mart stores nationwide following the wrongful death of a Missouri newborn who consumed it and later died of a rare infection.

The source of the bacteria has not yet been determined, but it is known to occur naturally in plants such as wheat and rice. Manufacturers routinely test for such germs but this may be one case where such precautions were not enough to avoid disaster.

Avery Cornett of Lebanon, Missouri died of a rare infection caused by bacteria known as Cronobacter sakazakii, according to recently released hospital reports. Though the infection is treatable, it is very dangerous to premature babies and those less than 1 month old.

Wal-Mart has decided to pull the Enfamil Newborn formula from its shelves as a precaution after the death of Cornett. However, the much bigger step of recalling the formula has not yet occurred as the manufacturer claims tests showed no bacteria was present in the batch shipped to retailers. Further tests to confirm or deny this claim are underway.

The death of another newborn, Ivyionna Ayne Marie Pinnix, from Granite City is also under investigation. Pinnix, born four weeks premature, appeared congested before she eventually stopped breathing sometime Wednesday morning. It remains to be seen whether she consumed the same Enfamil formula under investigation in this case.

A third infant, from Illinois, came down with the exact same bacterial infection as Cornett after consuming several types of powdered baby formula in the last month. Thankfully the Illinois infant has recovered after receiving treatment in a Missouri hospital.

Though no final results have been released, health officials suggest parents take the following steps to help guard against possible infection:

• Sanitize bottles and the nipples before using.
• Bring water that will be used in formula to a boil for two minutes.
• Discard any unused formula after 24 hours and do not make more than you intend to consume as leftovers can develop germs.

Customers who bought the formula in 12.5 ounce cans with the lot number ZP1K7G may return them for a refund or exchange.

If your child has been injured due to negligence of others you need an experienced St. Louis personal injury attorney on your side. For a free consultation, call our Missouri injury lawyers today at (314) 863-0500.

Source: "Baby formula pulled from shelves after Missouri infant's death," by Blythe Bernhard, published at STLToday.com.

See Our Related Blog Posts:
Wrongful Death Laws in Missouri - Can a Claim be Made if a Pregnant Woman loses her Baby?
Wrongful Death Suit Filed Against Katie's Kids Learning Center Daycare

In premise liability ("slip and fall" cases), oftentimes the issue of "subsequent remedial remedies" comes up. Meaning, repairs or improvements made to the premises after the injury occurs. See Missouri Injury Lawyer Article: Evidentiary Issues in Slip and Fall Cases Under Missouri injury law, it is oftentimes difficult to get subsequent remedial measures into evidence in slip and fall cases. However, in Missouri product liability personal injury cases, it is much easier to get subsequent remedial measures into evidence. For example, was the product flaw corrected and do the subsequent models sold have that correction? Those corrections or modifications can be used as evidence at trial in product liability cases in Missouri.

Missouri law allows evidence of subsequent remedial measures in Missouri strict liability lawsuits, and the courts have stated:

"[T]hat in strict liability cases, post remedial measures may be relevant. In strict liability cases, fault prior to the accident is not material. Instead, the question is whether or not there was a defect in the product when the plaintiff was injured. Subsequent repairs can be probative of this fact." See Pollard v. Ashby, 793 S.W.2d 394, 403 (Mo. App. E.D. 1990).

The Federal Rules of Evidence are not as favorable as the Missouri rule on this point, however, for proper purposes this evidence can be introduced in Federal cases as well. Federal Rule of Evidence 407 states that subsequent remedial measures are admissible for "proving ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures, if controverted, or impeachment."

Continue reading "Using Evidence of Subsequent Repairs or Remedial Measures in Missouri Product Liability Cases" »

A recent article, link below, reported a fairly common personal injury lawsuit, an injury caused from a broken or defective chair (Missouri Broken Chair Lawsuit - Sample Petition). In the article below, an injured woman is suing a local store after sustaining a fall when a chair collapsed and caused her serious personal injury. She is alleging negligence against the store and is seeking compensatory damages for her injuries.

As a St Louis Missouri Personal Injury Attorney we make sure we name all responsible and negligent parties and all potential causes of action. In my opinion, the injury lawyer in the article cited below should sue for more than just negligence of the store; but also for strict product liability and negligence against the chair manufacturer as well as a res ipsa claim against the store. (See: Missouri Personal Injury and "Res Ipsa" Claims)

This is similar to a Missouri personal injury – premises liability case our St Louis injury law firm is currently handling involving a broken chair and serious injury to our client's back, hip, and pelvis.

While on a business trip to Kansas City MO, the injured client was attending a seminar at an airport hotel. While sitting down at a table to begin the meeting, the metal chair he sat on immediately collapsed, causing him to fall and sustain severe injury to his hip, pelvis, and back. Moreover, the victim was of below average weight at 160 pounds. See CDC Average Weight Statistics

Our Missouri personal injury attorneys filed a lawsuit against the hotel for negligent maintenance, storage, and inspection. See Our Recent Missouri premise Liability Cases. Additionally, we are making strict product liability claims and negligence claims against the chair manufacturer.

Article: Broken chair lawsuit

We receive a lot of questions regarding personal injury related statute of limitations for Missouri and Illinois. Keeping in mind that each and every case is dependent on many different variables, below we have listed Missouri and Illinois civil statutes of limitations. This is to be used as general information only and should not dissuade you from seeking counsel for your individual situation.

Most of the Missouri civil statutes of limitations are in Title 35 (XXXV), Chapter 516 of the Missouri Revised Statutes. Most Illinois civil statutes can be found on the Illinois General Assembly website.

Missouri

Personal Injury, 5 years
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516-120.4

Product Liability, 5 years
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516-120.4

Wrongful Death, 3 years
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537-100

Illinois

Medical Malpractice, 2 years after knowledge of injury (or should have known)
735 ILCS 5/13-212

Personal Injury, 2 years
735 ILCS 5/13-202

Products Liability, 12 years from the date of first sale, or 10 years from the date of the first sale to initial user, whichever expires earlier.
735 ILCS 5/13-213(b)

Personal Property Damage, 5 years
735 ILCS 5/13-205

Wrongful Death, 2 years of death
740 ILCS 180/2

We hope this clarifies some of the questions you may have regarding your potential or ongoing Missouri or Illinois Personal Injury case.

If you believe you have a personal injury claim or lawsuit please contact St Louis Personal injury lawyer Ben Sansone immediately to discuss your potential claim, as once the statue of limitations runs, your claim is forever barred.

When you believe you are involved in a potential Missouri or Illinois Personal Injury claim, it can become a very confusing and emotional time for you and your family. I receive several phone calls and emails per week from new or potential new clients requesting information to better understand the process of a lawsuit. We at Sansone Law understand that having a clear procedural outline and timeline are key to client peace of mind.

Therefore, over the next few weeks we would like to flood you with applicable information which will take you step by step through the entire procedure.

We hope to answer some of the common questions frequently asked by new and potential new clients. Please contact us if you do not see information regarding a particular question you may have.

To the left of this article you can see a list of the types of cases we represent. Though we also specialize in Criminal and DWI/DUI Defense, our primary practice area is Personal Injury.

A Missouri and Illinois Personal Injury Lawsuit is a civil law case resulting from any type of accident that leads to bodily or psychological injury. It could encompass many different areas such as: auto accidents; product defects; medical malpractice; and those listed under the Personal Injury tab at the top of the page.

Normally, some form of “Do I have a case?” is the first question we hear. Here are a few things Missouri and Illinois Personal injury attorneys look for to see if the case has legal merit:

Most Missouri and Illinois personal injury claims have two very general but essential elements:

1. Liability: who is legally liable for your injury?
2. Damages: how much money are you entitled to?

In other words, not only does someone need to be negligent, but more importantly, an injury (mental, physical, or both) must be directly and proximately caused from the negligence. Mr. Sansone likes to analogize this area of law with the common saying, "no harm - no foul"

So, to recover damages as a result of one of the exampled types of Personal Injury cases, we need to know if, because of someone else’s negligence, you have suffered injury to your person or property.

Once we have determined whether or not your situation has legal merit, we will be able to sit down together and discuss moving forward with the investigatory part of your case.

Sansone Law does work on a contingent fee basis. This means that we will upfront all costs associated with the investigation and will be repaid only if a recovery is made. Therefore, if there is no recovery, there is no fee. Any and all costs advanced by the Sansone Law, shall be the financial responsibility of Sansone Law.

After we have completed the investigatory process, we will put together a demand package in hopes of settling your case out of court. This package will include the facts obtained in the investigatory period. If the negligent party will not settle, we will file a lawsuit on your behalf.

We hope this overview of the process helps dispel some questions or concerns regarding your potential personal injury case. We will have links associated with each step of this process that goes into further, specific detail.

A young child suffered severe personal injuries after the oxygen was cut off to her brain for several minutes when the lid of a trunk used for her toys fell and caught her neck. Apparently the trunk had been marketed for years with the knowledge that the trunk was used for toys, moreover, the trunk was at such a level as it is reasonably foreseeable that a young child would open the trunk. The trunk lacked any type of warnings as inappropriate for use as a toy box or warning of potential injury to young children. Moreover, the lid did not have any resistance to stop the lid from falling. Marketing research and safety analysis would have easily revealed this type of injury as reasonably foreseeable. See full article about severe personal injury to toddler.

As St Louis injury attorneys, we have handled multiple cases involving Missouri and Illinois product liability, Missouri and Illinois failure to warn lawsuits, and injury lawsuits because of unsafe toys or when toys are used in a way that is foreseeable and not warned about.

Missouri injury lawsuit - Dangerous Toy - Severe Personal Injury

Illinois wrongful death lawsuit - Dangerous Machine Product - Workplace Injury / Death

St Louis Personal Injury Lawsuit - Dangerous Toy caused Eye Injury

Illinois product liability lawyer filed lawsuit - Dangerous Product

Previously, the Missouri personal injury lawyers of Sansone Law have represented individuals injured by defective or dangerous toys, we have handled a previous Missouri toy eye injury case to a very successful conclusion. See Missouri toy eye injury lawsuit.

In August 2008 our Missouri personal injury client, Britney, sustained a major injury to her eye as a result of a Juggling Disc that was thrown to her.

Primary legal liability under Missouri personal injury law is for Missouri defective product design and failure to warn in context with the way the toy was marketed. Basically, the "toy" is actually a set of professional juggling discs which are very rigid and not appropriate for beginners and especially not children. however, they are marketed in the toy section of stores and no warnings or age appropriateness is given.

Her right eye suffered severe trauma and eventually will die and likely be removed and require a transplant. Her eye injuries included: Cornea damage (will require transplant); Iris damage (will require transplant); Pupil Damage; Large loss of Vitreous fluid; Severe damage to the Sclera (the outside of the eye) requiring 36 stitches. Stitches at the rear of the Sclera will remain permanent.

Sympathetic Ophthalmic conditions may occur where the good eye overworks itself into blindness or chronic pain may result in the eye removal procedure labeled Ocular Prosthesis. If these conditions do not exist then a procedure is used to fit a Scleral shell over the Scleral to cover a blind and/or unsightly eye.

Due to the eye injury and retinal detachment Brittney’s restrictions are as follows:
• She must lie at a 45-degree angle most of her waking day.
• She must lie at a 45-degree angle during sleeping hours.
• She must not lift anything over 10 pounds.
• She must not bend over. (Tie shoes, pick up dropped objects, scratch her legs etc.)
• Laxatives are taken to reduce the internal eye pressure during bowel movements.
• Sneezing needs to be kept to a minimum to reduce internal eye pressure.
• She must not care for her 3-year-old son, at this time due, to her aforementioned restrictions. This may have to continue for some time.
• She must have family administer her medications.
• She must have family bath her to insure the eye does not get wet.
• Driving is off limits.
• College has been postponed until further notice
• Work is no longer an option due to here 10 pound lift orders.

Brittney is a 21-year-old beautiful young lady. She, like most, is very conscience of her appearance. She is also very conscience of the fact that her eyesight may not return. Counseling to overcome this tragedy will take years to overcome. We are currently contacting specialists and blind and semi blind youth groups/organizations that specialize in this kind of mental trauma. She seems to be mentally stable at times then depression sets in which promotes sadness

In a previous Missouri injury lawyer blog entry, I discussed an Illinois dangerous product personal injury claim we are pursuing on behalf of an Illinois personal injury client. He was struck violently in the face and nose by a log piece that was ejected from a log splitter. See - Illinois Dangerous Product Personal Injury Claim - Log Splitter.

Oftentimes, personal injury claims can be settled favorably prior to a personal injury lawsuit needing to be filed. However, this is an example of a case that the insurance company and I cannot agree on the amount of damages as I believe strongly that my client's several painful nasal surgeries, past and future pain and suffering, and loss of his sense of smell are much more valuable than what they want to pay.

Therefore, personal injury lawyer Ben Sansone of Sansone Law in St Louis Missouri, recently filed a MacCoupin County Illinois products liability claim against the manufacturer of the log splitter and other parties involved in the design and marketing of the defective product. A detailed list of the defective designs making this log splitter a dangerous product when put to a reasonably anticipated use are laid out in our Illinois products liability complaint, described here.

Other examples of personal injury product liability / dangerous product cases our firm has handled or is currently handling:

Illinois Wrongful Death Lawsuit - Products Liability, Illinois Wrongful Death Claim, and Illinois Workers Compensation

Illinois Wrongful Death and Products Liability Lawyer - Work Related Death leads to Illinois Worker's Compensation Case and Products Liability Personal Injury Lawsuit

St Louis Missouri Products Liability Lawsuit - Eye Injury - Caused by Unsafe Toy Manufactured in China

On July 11, 2009 an Olin worker was tragically killed as the result of an Illinois industrial accident. He was operating a table lathe when apparently it inadvertently started causing a metal rod to swing around violently and fatally strike him across the chest. On behalf of the industrial worker's family, St Louis based Illinois personal injury lawyers, Sansone Law, are pursing an Illinois wrongful death claim, an Illinois products liability claim, and a negligent design claim against the table lathe manufacturer. Additionally, an Illinois worker's compensation claim has also been filed on behalf of the family.

Illinois Work Related Death - OSHA Investigating

Tragic death of Illinois worker at Olin Brass

Alton worker death after piece of metal on table lathe came loose, striking him in the chest and causing fatal injuries

Tragic work related Illinois wrongful death of Alton man

OSHA investigating work related death of Alton Illinois worker at Olin Brass

Verdict Reporter

4.5 Million dollar settlement - defective table lathe - products liability lawsuit and wrongful death

As many people have heard, Zicam, a popular homeopathic product that claims its use shortens the length of a cold, was the subject of a 12 million dollar class action settlement in 2006, however, the product remained on the market. Now the FDA has issued an advisement cautioning consumers against using Zicam.

Currently, the personal injury lawyers at Sansone Law are representing several individuals for loss of smell and against Zicam. If you believe you have suffered Anosmia (loss of smell) from the use of Zicam you may have a case.

The loss of smell is a very serious and debilitating problem that also practically eliminates someones sense of taste along with their sense of smell due to the interplay between taste and smell. For more detail on Anosmia - loss of smell and it affects see the Anosmia Foundation.

Contact Us Now - Injury Lawyers that handle Zicam Loss of Smell Cases

Zicam and other Homeopathic remedies largly unregulated - Dever Post Article

Currently, I am representing an Illinois personal injury victim that suffered severe injury to his nose after being struck in the face when using a defective log splitter. See - Illinois Products Liability Personal Injury - Nose Injury & Loss of Smell.

My client lost his sense of smell as a direct result of the defective product. The case is currently in settlement negotiations, however, if we are not able to resolve the case we will be proceeding with a lawsuit. This is not a common injury, so a little research revealed some substantial verdicts and settlements wherein loss of smell was a primary injury.

$500,000 awarded to man who loses sense of smell as result of a fall down an Elevator shaft (http://www.siaccident.com/CM/Custom/Results.asp)

$1.2 MILLION. Recovery for emotional difficulties and loss of sense of smell and taste
Plaintiff carpenter fell six-feet from a scaffold, striking his head on the floor. Although diagnostic tests, including an MRI, did not show a brain injury, the plaintiff's family noticed a change in his behavior, and he complained of emotional difficulties and a loss of sense of smell and taste. (http://www.accidentslawyernewyork.com/verdicts-settlements)

$850,000 obtained for plaintiff
Woman strikes head in a car accident causing frontal subdural hematoma resulting in loss of sense of smell.
(http://www.gellerandsiegel.com/CM/Custom/Verdicts-Settlements.asp )

$12,000,000.00 ZICAM maker settles lawsuit over User’s Loss of Smell

Class action lawsuit alleging varying loss of smell for about 300 users.
(http://www.thedenverchannel.com/7newsinvestigates/6279576/detail.html)

$600,000 products liability settlement for loss of smell
Truck driver whose primary injury was the loss of his sense of smell. The truck driver claimed a design defect in a milk truck because it failed to provide a grab handle on the rear driver's side of the truck.
(http://www.marylandinjurylawyerblog.com/2006/06/600000_settlement_in_products.html )

Currently we are handling a St. Louis Missouri personal injury truck accident case that involved a commercial truck driver whose truck was being repaired so his employer a Missouri trucking company rented a similar commercial truck from Penske truck rental. The large sleeper cabin in the back of the semi-truck did not have adequate safety equipment or padding for the sleeping or resting passenger who is often the secondary or relief commercial truck driver. The tractor trailer was involved in large truck accident outside of St Louis Missouri while my client was asleep in the back. He suffered serious personal injury while traveling through Illinois, mainly several cervical fractures from the Illinois truck crash, because the sleeper cabin had no padding and no way to secure a sleeping truck driver. Thus, he contacted us, top St Louis injury lawyers.

As a St Louis personal injury lawyer handling large truck accidents, I see this as a truck accident case against the liable driver, but also a Missouri products liability and a Missouri negligent maintenance case for the truck rental company's failure to have and maintain proper truck safety and security for the truck driver resting in the cabin.

I have handled cases in the past regarding rental cars being improperly maintained as they are often abused and the rental company wants to put as little maintenance money in them as possible to boost profit margins. This is a recipe for disaster, as someone is inevitably going to suffer serious personal injury as a result of the negligent truck maintenance.

Recently U-Haul incurred a judgment of $84 million as the result of serious personal injury to a man who was run over by a truck that he rented from U-Haul. The man parked the truck on a slight incline and when the parking brake failed the truck ran him over causing severe personal injuries, including a broken pelvis preventing him from walking ever again. The rental truck personal injury lawyers discovered the truck brakes to be defective and total lack of maintenance after several hundred thousand miles of rental truck driving.

The problem is the total lack of maintenance. For example, I was able to get a great settlement for a client regarding an Illinois bus accident lawsuit after he stepped in front of a Greyhound bus from in between parked cars, however, the Greyhound bus brakes were malfunctioning and the driver was unable to stop to avoid the collision. See - Illinois Bus Accident Injury Lawyer Lawsuit Settlement.

If you or someone you know rent a truck make sure to drive carefully and check to make sure the truck is operating properly. If you or someone you know are the victim of an unfortunate truck accident personal injury in St Louis Missouri or anywhere in Missouri or Illinois, call us, Missouri truck accident lawyers and Illinois truck accident lawyers.

St Louis Personal Injury Attorneys

Illinois Truck Accident and Injury Lawyer

Recently I settled an Illinois Workers Compensation case for $500,000, see Illinois Work Comp Death Case Settlement. Now that the Illinois worker's compensation case is resolved I am pursuing an Illinois products liability death lawsuit resulting from a improperly manufactured or designed cantilever that did not close and thus failed to prevent the worker from falling to his untimely death. A good Illinois personal injury lawyer must look beyond just the worker's compensation liability and investigate other potential defendants and theories of legal liability that allow the client to recovery beyond workers compensation, as the amount recoverable is limited by regulation.

When is there more to recover than just work comp? In the above case, the clients came to me because their first lawyer refused to pursue the products liability case and just wanted to represent them on the Illinois work comp case. The products liability case in this matter is what is known as a 3rd party claim. Generally, workers' compensation statutes and regulations prevent any other recovery by an injured worker or his family other than from work comp insurance through the work comp courts. Recovery is limited and regulated. However, when another party besides the employer is at fault there may exist a third party personal injury case. Many lawyers just want the work comp case and do not want to pursue the other parties, if you find yourself in this situation call me, because we always look into that possibility, and in the above case lead to an Illinois personal injury products liability wrongful death case. As in the above case, the original Illinois work comp attorney refused to take the products liability case, through investigation we have discovered that the cantilever is defective and thus the family has a claim worth potentially millions of dollars. Fortunately, they contacted me and we were able to explore these options and find a wrongful death products liability case.

What is a products liability case? A products liability case is simply as case wherein a defective product caused personal injury. In the above case, the cantilever malfunctioned or was improperly designed as it failed to close, allowing the lanyard to come unhooked from a water tower and allow the worker to fall, causing his unfortunate death. The specific cause of the malfunction I cannot get into at this point, however, as the picture to the right demonstrates, the cantilever fails to close and leaves over a one inch gap. Therefore, based on the facts and witness testimony regarding the fall it will show that had the clip closed all the way the lanyard would not have come unhooked and the worker would not have fallen from the top of the water tower and died. The defect is the libility, the circumstances leading to the fall are the causation, and the death is the damages, the three general requirements for a successful Missouri or Illinois personal injury lawsuit that an injury lawyer looks for.