The Subrogation Strategist

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On August 25, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Razor USA Recalls GLW Battery Packs Sold with Hovertrax 2.0 Self-Balancing Hoverboards Due to Fire Hazard.

According to the CPSC, “[t]he lithium-ion GLW ... Continue Reading

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On August 18, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Intertex Recalls Blower Fans Due to Fire Hazard.

According to the CPSC, “[t]he capacitor in the recalled VP-33 blower fans can overheat, posing a fire ... Continue Reading

In Allstate Ins. Co. v. LG Elecs. USA, Inc., No. 19-3529, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania considered whether plaintiff’s expert engineer’s opinion that there were two possible causes of a fire—both related to alleged product defects within a refrigerator manufactured by the defendant—was sufficient to support the malfunction theory of products liability. The court found that because both potential causes imposed liability on the product manufacturer and the expert ruled out misuse of the product, as well as all external causes of the fire, it was not necessary for the engineer to identify a specific cause under the malfunction theory. The court also found that the expert’s investigation and opinions met the criteria set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) and the Federal Rules of Evidence and, thus, were admissible.Continue Reading

In Griffin v. Ste. Michelle Wine Estates Ltd., No. 47703, 2021 Ida. LEXIS 127, the Supreme Court of Idaho considered whether an Italian wine bottle manufacturer’s contacts with Idaho were sufficient under the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution to permit the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the manufacturer in Idaho for a plaintiff’s product liability action. Stated another way, the court considered whether a manufacturer located outside the United States (with no domestic presence) could be sued in Idaho because its’ product reached Idaho and caused injury.Continue Reading

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On August 12, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:

1. Rugs Recalled Due to Violation of Federal Flammability Standard and Fire Hazard; Imported by Suellen Roosevein; Sold Exclusively on Amazon.com (Recall ...

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. Recently, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:

1. Specialized Bicycle Components Recalls Electric Mountain Bike Battery Packs Due to Fire and Burn Hazards (Recall Alert). According to the CPSC, “[w]ater can ...

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On August 4, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Two Million Dehumidifiers With Well-Known Brand Names Recalled Due to Fire and Burn Hazards; Manufactured by New Widetech.

The brands recalled included ... Continue Reading

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On July 21, 2021, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:

1. American Outdoor Brands Recalls Caldwell Earmuffs with Rechargeable Lithium-Battery Packs Due to Fire and Burn Hazards. According to the CPSC, “[t]he ...