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 December 7, 2017, the Consumer Product Safety Commission announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Westinghouse Portable Generators Recalled by MWE Investments Due to Fire Hazard.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.Continue Reading

In the United States, to prove a products liability claim based upon a design defect, the plaintiff must either meet: (1) the consumer-expectation test, or (2) the risk-utility test, depending upon the jurisdiction. Although Nevada has historically followed the consumer-expectation test, in a recent decision the Supreme Court of Nevada evaluated whether to adopt the more stringent risk-utility test. Ultimately, the court rejected adoption of the risk-utility test and reaffirmed its prior precedent holding that a plaintiff need only meet the consumer-expectation test. See Ford Motor Company v. Trejo, 2017 Nev. LEXIS 90 (September 27, 2017).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 October 20, 2017, the Consumer Product Safety Commission announced the following expanded recall related to Bosch, Gaggenau, Jenn-Air and Thermador products that present a fire hazard:

BSH Home Appliances Expands Recall of Dishwashers Due to Fire Hazard.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 September 26, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Saber Grills Recalls Grills and LP Regulators Due to Fire and Burn Hazards.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 September 6, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Kawasaki Recalls Brute Force 300 All-Terrain Vehicles Due to Fire Hazard.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 23, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Academy Sports + Outdoors Recalls Crawfish Kits with Strainer Due to Fire Hazard.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 16, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

FedEx Supply Chain Recalls Cellphone Batteries That Could Lead to Fire and Burn Hazards.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 10, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Kawasaki Recalls All-Terrain Vehicles Due to Fire Hazard.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 7, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Firewood Recalls Vaporizers Due to Fire Hazard.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 2, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Fred’s Recalls Charcoal Grills Due to Fire Hazard.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 28, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Nestlé Waters North America Recalls AccuPure Water Dispensers Due to Fire and Burn Hazards.Continue Reading

By: Edward A. Jaeger, Jr. and William L. Doerler

In products liability actions, in order to ensure that all potentially liable parties are included in a lawsuit, subrogation professionals often include strict liability claims against products sellers within the chain of distribution for a product. In West Virginia, the Legislature recently enacted legislation, W. Va. Code § 55-7-31, designed to protect “innocent” sellers from product liability lawsuits. The legislation states that, for actions involving a product sold on or after July 6, 2017, no product liability action – i.e. a strict liability action – can be maintained against a seller unless the seller meets one of the noted exceptions.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 25, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Polaris Recalls RZR 170 Recreational Off-Highway Vehicles Due to Fuel Leak, Fire Hazards.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 24, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

iRover Recalls Self-Balancing Scooters/Hoverboards Due to Fire Hazard.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 19, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Polaris Recalls Sportsman 570 All-Terrain Vehicles Due to Fuel Leak, Fire Hazards.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 13, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

YSN Imports Recalls Refillable Propane Cylinders Due to Fire, Explosion Hazards.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 5, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Lumicentro Internacional with Home Depot Recalls Crystal Chandeliers Due to Fire and Burn Hazards.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 June 20, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Kawasaki Recalls Utility Vehicles, Recreational Off-Highway Vehicles and All-Terrain Vehicles Due to Fire Hazard.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 May 26, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Cordless Electric Lawn Mowers Recalled Due to Fire Hazard; Made by Hongkong Sun Rise Trading.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 May 23, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Sportex Recalls Salt Rock Lamps Due to Shock and Fire Hazards.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. The CPSC recently announced the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Carrier and Bryant Recall Heat Pumps Due to Fire Hazard

Night Lights Recalled by AM Conservation Group Due to Fire Hazard.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 May 12, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire spread hazard:

Honeywell International Recalls SWIFT® Wireless Gateway Sold with Fire Alarm Systems Due To Failure to Communicate in Fire.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 May 5, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Springs Window Fashions Recalls Lithium Batteries Sold with Motorized Window Coverings Due to Fire and Burn Hazards.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 April 20, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Food Dehydrators Recalled by Greenfield World Trade Due to Fire and Burn Hazards.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 April 13, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Bosch Solar Services Recalls Solar Panels Due To Fire Hazard

Polaris Recalls Ranger 900 Recreational Off-Highway Vehicles Due to Fire and Burn HazardsContinue 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 March 24, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

OPW Recalls Gas Station Hose Swivel Connectors Due to Fire, Explosion HazardsContinue 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 March 23, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Vecaro LifeStyle Recalls Self-Balancing Scooters/Hoverboards Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 March 21, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Polaris Recalls Sportsman 850 and 1000 All-Terrain Vehicles Due to Burn and Fire HazardsContinue 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 March 14, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Battery Chargers for XBOX ONE Video Game Controllers Recalled by Performance Designed Products Due to Burn HazardContinue 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 March 10, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

R.W. Beckett Recalls Fuel Oil Valves Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 March 2, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Polaris Recalls RZR and GENERAL Recreational Off-Highway Vehicles Due to Burn and Fire HazardsContinue 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 March 1, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Philips Lighting Expands Recall of Metal Halide Lamps Due to Fire and Laceration HazardsContinue 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 February 23, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:

Carrier Expands Recall of Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps Due to Fire Hazard

STIHL Recalls Chain Saws Due to Fire and Burn HazardsContinue 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 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 February 2, 2017, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Walt Disney Parks and Resorts Recalls Mickey Mouse Nightlights Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 January 25, 2017, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Country Home Products Recalls Field & Brush Mowers Due to Fire and Burn HazardsContinue 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 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 January 24, 2017, the CPSC issued the following, expanded recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

HP Expands Recall of Batteries for HP and Compaq Notebook Computers Due to Fire and Burn HazardsContinue 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 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 issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Nantucket Distributing Recalls Pre-Lit Christmas Trees Due to Fire Hazard (Recall Alert)

Arctic Cat Recalls Snowmobiles Due to Fire Hazard (Recall Alert)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 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 January 4, 2017, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Curio Design Recalls Modular Lights and Bases Due to Shock and Fire Hazards (Recall Alert)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 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 January 12, 2017, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Boosted Recalls Electric Skateboards Due to Fire Hazard.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 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 January 4, 2017, the CPSC issued the following expanded recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Toshiba Expands Recall of Laptop Computer Battery Packs Due to Burn and Fire Hazards.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 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 December 16, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

LG Electronics Recalls Portable Air Conditioners Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2017/Masterbuilt-Recalls-LP-Gas-SmokersContinue 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 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 December 6, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Target Re-announces Recall of Menorahs Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 November 29, 2016, the CPSC issued the following re-announced recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Gree Re-announces Dehumidifier Recall Following 450 Fires and $19 Million in Property Damage; Brand Names Include Frigidaire, Soleus Air, Kenmore ... 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 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 November 10, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Kidde Recalls Combination Smoke/CO Alarms Due to Alarm FailureContinue 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 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 November 2, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Dehumidifiers Made by Midea Recalled Due to Serious Fire and Burn Hazards; $4.8 Million in Property Damage Reported

The recall involves 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 65, 70, and ... 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 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 November 1, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Kikkerland Design Recalls Teapots with Stands Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 October 20, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Cabela’s Recalls Food Dehydrators Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 October 18, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Sherwood Marketing Recalls 3 Squares Rice and Slow Cookers Due to Fire, Electric Shock HazardsContinue 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 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 September 20, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

 Denon Recalls Rechargeable Battery Packs Due to Fire and Burn HazardsContinue 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 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 September 15, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

GE Appliances Recalls Top-Loading Clothes Washers Due to Fire Hazard

Samsung Recalls Galaxy Note7 Smartphones Due to Serious Fire and Burn Hazards

Polaris ... 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 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, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

All Power Portable Generators Recalled by J.D. North America Due to Explosion, Fire and Burn Hazards

Whirlpool Recalls Microwaves Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 23, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Crownplace Brands Recalls Kerosene Lamp Burners Due to Burn and Fire HazardsContinue 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 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 14, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Home Source Recalls Floor Lamps Due to Fire and Shock HazardsContinue 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 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 June 23, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

HP Recalls Batteries for HP and Compaq Notebook Computers Due to Fire and Burn HazardsContinue 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 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 June 15, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Sony Recalls VAIO Laptop Computer Battery Packs Due to Burn and Fire HazardsContinue Reading

In Genuine Parts Company v. Cepec, -- A.3d --, 2016 WL 1569077 (Del. Apr. 18, 2016), the plaintiffs, Ralph and Sandra Cepec, who are Georgia residents, filed suit against, among others, Genuine Parts Company (Genuine Parts), a Georgia corporation that was properly registered to do business in Delaware. The plaintiffs filed suit to pursue asbestos-related personal injury claims having nothing to do with Genuine Parts’ activities in Delaware. Genuine Parts moved to dismiss the claims against it for lack of general and specific personal jurisdiction. The trial court denied Genuine Parts’ motion, finding that, by complying with Delaware’s statute requiring foreign corporations to register to do business in Delaware and to appoint an in-state agent for service of process, Genuine Parts consented to general jurisdiction in Delaware. Because the Superior Court based its finding on a theory of express consent to personal jurisdiction, the court did not conduct a due process inquiry.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 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 June 9, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

360 Electrical Recalls Surge Protectors Due to Shock and Fire Hazards.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 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 May 31, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Mirka Recalls Electric Random Orbital Sanders Due to Fire Hazard

Broan-NuTone Recalls Ventilation Fans Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 May 26, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Rheem Recalls to Repair Water Heaters Due to Fire and Burn Hazards; Sold Exclusively at Home DepotContinue 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 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 May 24, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Water Heating Technologies Recalls Gas Water Heaters Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 April 26, 2016, the Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

One World Technologies Recalls Snow Blowers Due to Fire and Burn Hazards; Sold Exclusively at Home DepotContinue 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 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 April 19, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Brunton Outdoors Recalls Battery Packs Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 April 12, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Coleman Recalls Flashlights Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 March 31, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

CE North America Expands Recall of Fan Heaters Due to Fire Hazard; Sold Exclusively at H-E-B

Gamewell-FCI Recalls Fire Alarm Panels Due to Failure to Alert of a Fire ... 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 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 March 30, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Toshiba Recalls Laptop Computer Battery Packs Due to Burn and Fire HazardsContinue 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 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 March 21, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Panasonic Recalls Lithium-ion Laptop Battery Packs Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 March 15, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Franklin Fueling Systems Recalls Gas Station Hose/Swivel Fitting Sets Due to Fire, Explosion HazardsContinue 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 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 March 9, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Z Gallerie Recalls Wall Clocks Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 March 3, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Pelican Products Recalls Flashlights and Replacement Battery Packs Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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. The CPSC recently issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Illume Recalls Valentine’s Day-Themed Ceramic Mugs Due to Fire Hazard; Sold Exclusively at Target Stores

Ambient Weather Expands Recall of Radios Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 February 17, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Goodman Company Expands Recall of Air Conditioning and Heating Units Due to Burn and Fire HazardsContinue 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 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 February 12, 2016, the Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Crescent Point Energy Recalls To Inspect Propane Gas Due to Fire and Burn HazardContinue 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 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 February 4, 2016, the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

CE North America Recalls Fan Heaters Due to Fire Hazard; Sold Exclusively at Bed Bath & Beyond

Microsoft Recalls AC Power Cords for Surface Pro Devices Due to Fire ... 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 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 January 28, 2016, the CPSC issued a recall for Varaluz Longfellow Light Fixtures because they present a fire hazard. A link to the recall notice can be found below:

Varaluz Recalls Longfellow Light Fixtures Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 January 14, 2016, the CPSC issued a recall notice for Altar’d State monogrammed coffee mugs because the mugs present a fire hazard. You can find the recall notice at the link that follows:

Altar’d State Recalls Monogrammed Coffee Mugs Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 January 19, 2016, the CPSC issued a recall for Seasonal Specialties’ Synchronized Music and Lighting System because the product presents a fire hazard. A link to the recall notice is provided below:

Seasonal Specialties Recalls Synchronized Music and Lighting System Due ... 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 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 December 22, 2015 the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Carrier Recalls Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, Including Previously Recalled Units, Due to Fire Hazard.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 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 December 8, 2015, the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Limoss Recalls Battery Power Packs for Power Recliners and Lift Chairs Due to Fire HazardContinue 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 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 November 18, the CPSC issued a recall notice for twenty eight (28) different recalled products sold by Home Depot after they were recalled. Some of the recalled products are products that present fire hazards. To view the recall notice, click the link provided below.Continue Reading

In Dominguez v. Hayward Industries, Inc., Certified Gunite Company d/b/a Custom Pools, and John M. Pieklo, -- So.3d ----, 2015 WL 5438782 (3d DCA Sept. 16, 2015), the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, discussed whether products liability claims related to a pool filter, a component part of a pool system, were subject to Florida’s twelve-year products liability statute of repose, section 95.031, Florida Statutes. The court held that a pool filter does not constitute an improvement to real property and, thus, the plaintiffs’ claims were subject to the statute of repose.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 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 November 12, 2015, the CPSC issued the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

STIHL Recalls Edgers, Trimmer/Brushcutters, Pole Pruners and KombiMotors Due to Fire Hazard

Family Dollar Recalls Wax Warmers Due to Fire and Burn Hazards

PNY ... Continue Reading

Pennsylvania has maintained its own peculiar brand of strict products liability law ever since the Supreme Court decided Azzarello v. Black Bros. Co., Inc.[1] in 1978. Maligned by many as “absurd and unworkable,”[2] if “excessively” orientated towards plaintiffs,[3] Azzarello’s unique approach to the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A (1965)[4] has recently been judicially consigned to the dustbin of history.

In Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc.,[5] decided on November 19, 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court expressly ... Continue Reading

By: Edward A. Jaeger, Jr. and William L. Doerler

In Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., -- A.3d --, 2014 WL 6474923 (Pa. Nov. 19, 2014), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania discussed the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s products liability law and, overturning prior precedent, clarified the law. In particular, the Court, overturned Azzarello v. Black Brothers Company, 480 Pa. 547, 391 A.2d 1020 (1978), clarified the role of the judge and the jury in products liability cases and settled the question of whether Pennsylvania would adopt the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability §§ ... Continue Reading

By: Edward A. Jaeger, Jr. and William L. Doerler

In Mayer v. Once Upon a Rose, Inc., 58 A.3d 1221 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 2013), the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court addressed the question of whether, despite the fact that the plaintiff had invoked the res ipsa loquitur (res ipsa) doctrine, the trial court properly granted a directed verdict in the defendant’s favor because the plaintiff did not have a liability expert. The Appellate Division held that the plaintiff did not need a liability expert to pursue its case because the matters at issue did not require ... Continue Reading