Product Liability

Published on: October 18, 2022

Eliminating Statute of Limitations for Childhood Sexual Abuse

boy-1666611_6401 President Biden recently signed the Eliminating Limits to Justice for Child Sex Abuse Victims Act. This bill eliminates the statute of limitations for civil claims filed by those who were sexually abused as minors. The Senate passed the law by unanimous vote earlier this year, and it passed by the House by voice vote recently. It covers federal lawsuits involving minors who went through human trafficking, child pornography, sexual abuse, or forced labor. Although a significant percentage of childhood sexual abuse goes unreported, the signing of the bill is a huge step forward for survivors hoping for justice. If you were harmed by childhood sexual abuse, you should call the seasoned personal injury lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Childhood Sexual Abuse Claim

Historically, minors who survived childhood sexual abuse could file federal civil claims until they arrived at age 28 or, alternatively, for ten years after they discovered a violation or injury. Criminal claims arising out of childhood sexual abuse were not subject to a federal statute of limitations. The recently signed bill eliminates time constraints for survivors to file civil claims related to a range of sex abuse crimes against minors, including forced labor, sex trafficking, sexual abuse, aggravated sexual abuse, and sexual exploitation of children.

Senators Dick Durbin of Illinois and Marsha Blackburn introduced the bipartisan bill. Senators Dianne Feinstein, John Cornyn, and Patrick Leahy co-sponsored it. Senator Durbin commented on how long it typically takes for victims to come forward after suffering these kinds of trauma in his statement once the House had passed the bill. Organizations that endorsed the law include RAINN, National Alliance to End Sexual Violence (NAESV), CHILD USA, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 11, 2022

Lawyers for Injuries Arising Out of Exactech Implant Systems

By Moll Law Group

operation-1807543_6401-300x217 Exactech is a leading maker of implant systems, medical devices, used in joint replacement surgeries. The company had recalled all its knee, hip & ankle replacement implants made after 2004 when it was found that a packaging defect resulted in degradation of a polyethylene insert prior to use. When an insert prematurely fails, a patient may experience severe pain; the failure may necessitate a revision surgery to replace it. Recently, in the course of a hearing, the cases were consolidated in multidistrict litigation. If you were harmed by an Exactech implant system, you should discuss your claim with the knowledgeable product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Call Moll Law Group About Exactech Implant Injuries

An orthopedic surgeon, along with a biomedical engineer and organizational culture advocate, founded Exactech to develop and make joint implants, which are used by surgeons to relieve pain and also allow for mobility. Exactech’s product line includes software and instruments, along with biologics meant to accelerate wound healing. The company’s primary products are hip, shoulder, ankle, and knee replacement devices with varying names. Novation, Alteon, and BIOLOXdelta are Exactech hip replacement models.

Studies have revealed that the company’s hip implants have a 5-year survival rate, which means there is a lower chance that an implant would need to be replaced in 5 years. Over a period of years, Exactech has faced lawsuits based on allegations that it knowingly sold defective products to government entities and participated in unlawful consulting agreements with doctors. The company faces numerous legal claims based on the circumstances of its recall of ankle and knee implants last year and this year. The Novation Element Step had at least a 92.4% survival rate at 5 years. The authors of the study stressed that further long-term studies were needed to evaluate performance over time.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 20, 2022

Manufacturer Class 1 Recall of the Hamilton-C6 Intensive Care Ventilator

By Moll Law Group

healing-g05658ec7b_640-e1662149522499 Recently, Hamilton Medical AG recalled its Hamilton-C6 Intensive Care Ventilator after discovering potential water ingress, the result of a potential defect, could halt breathing support. The water ingress was found in the course of investigating a customer complaint that demonstrated loose hardware in the status indicator board for the ventilator. As a result, water can seep between the main board and the indicator board. This is a class I recall, which means it’s serious and that using the ventilator could result in a patient’s severe injury or death. For that reason, it’s imperative that patients and their doctors not use the ventilator in question. If you or a loved one were injured by the Hamilton-C6 Intensive Care Ventilator, you should call the seasoned product liability attorneys of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in claims and lawsuits with which we’ve been involved.

Discuss Your Potential Claim with Moll Law Group

Doctors use the ventilator in question to give infants, children, and adults breathing support through a tube inserted into the airway, nose or mouth, or a face mask. However, water ingress could cause the ventilator to revert to its safety mode or ambient state, or provide flawed services, which means the machine would not provide the help patients need. Another, alternate source of ventilation would need to be given —the patient could suffer hypoxia, a brain injury caused by lack of oxygen. Another possible injury the patient could suffer is carbon dioxide build-up. The worst outcomes are death.

While there have been 128 complaints around the world about this issue with the ventilator, there have been no reported injuries or deaths so far. The manufacturer issued a Field Safety Notice with specific guidance on June 27, 2022. The Notice recommended that doctors and hospitals check the ventilators in question if they’re in use and let the distributor know right away if the status indicator board had come loose, in which case, the front housing of the ventilator has to be replaced. The replacement should occur immediately so that a patient doesn’t suffer injury, and doctors have been instructed to give a patient alternative ventilation.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 13, 2022

Recall of More Than 2 Million MamaRoo and RockaRoo Infant Swings and Rockers

By Moll Law Group

baby-g0c0b11dd5_640-e1662148257700 On August 15, 2022, the manufacturer 4moms recalled MamaRoo Baby Swing, versions 1.0 through 4.0 and RockaRoo Baby Rockers. They announced that there is a hazard associated with the swings and rockers; when restraint straps hang below the seat and are not being used to secure an infant in the seat, a crawling infant can get tangled up and even strangled by the dangling straps. The recall affected 220,000 RockaRoo rockers, and 2 million MamaRoo swings. If your child was injured or died because of entanglement in a rocker or swing strap, you should give the seasoned product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group a call.

Call Moll Law Group About a MamaRoo Baby Swing or RockaRoo Baby Rocker Claim

The MamaRoo baby swing and the RockaRoo baby rocker are intended to calm or occupy babies. The former provides several different motions, speeds and sounds. Only those MamaRoo models that have a 3 point harness, not a 5 point harness, were recalled. These are versions 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0. The rocker glides front to back and has control knobs to control the range of motion. The recalled model is 4M-012, which is printed on the bottom of the rocker.

Thorley Industries, LLC, d.b.a. 4 moms announced the recall of these rockers and swings due to entanglement hazards. The company has received two reports of infant entanglement in hanging straps. A ten-month old infant was asphyxiated and died. Another suffered bruising on his neck but was, fortunately, saved by his caregiver. While there have been no reports regarding the RockaRoo baby rockers, they also have hanging straps and therefore may pose a risk.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 6, 2022

Unexpected Decision in 3M Litigation

By Moll Law Group

soldier-gba1564472_640 U.S. bankruptcy Judge Jeffrey Graham recently ruled that military veterans who allege they suffered hearing loss because of 3M earplugs can continue to pursue litigation against the company, even though their subsidiaries filed for bankruptcy on July 26^th. This ruling disrupts earplug manufacturer 3M’s efforts to evade payment of claims arising out of earplugs plaintiffs believe caused their hearing loss. Company shares plummeted 12% after this ruling. If you suffered hearing loss due to 3M earplugs, you should give our experienced product liability lawyers a call. At Moll Law Group, billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your 3M Earplug Claim

Court-watchers were not expecting the bankruptcy judge’s decision. Often courts do agree to stay (stop) litigation against subsidiaries’ solvent parent companies when they are being sued by many litigants and want to use the bankruptcy process to get a global settlement that might not represent the true value of the plaintiffs’ losses. The bankruptcy judge’s decision, couched within bankruptcy law, doesn’t stop 3M or its subsidiaries from trying to globally settle the litigation, but the company doesn’t have as much leverage to force plaintiffs to settle if there is no stay. Meanwhile the MDL judge left this decision in the bankruptcy court’s hands.

So far, 3M has lost 10 out of 16 bellwether trials in the earplugs litigation. It still asserts that its earplugs weren’t defective, and that bankruptcy would be an appropriate means of resolving liability. It has filed a notice of appeal of the ruling and may try to appeal directly to the Seventh Circuit, United States Circuit Court of Appeals.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 2, 2022

Jury Awards More than $4.8 Million at Conclusion of Hernia Mesh Trial

By Moll Law Group

surgery-ga9893dfa2_640 In a recent decision, a jury has awarded over $4.8 million in the Ventralex hernia mesh path trial Trevino v. Davol Inc., Providence County Superior Court, Rhode Island, No. PC-2018-8437. The trial is believed to be the first hernia mesh case to go to trial in state court, and it was filed against manufacturers Davol Inc. and C.R. Bard. The jury came to its decision on August 29^th, and with interest, the award may go up to $7.68 million. If you were injured by Ventralex hernia mesh or another brand of hernia mesh, you should consult the experienced product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group about whether you have a claim for damages arising out of defects in the mesh.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Hernia Mesh Lawsuit

Many plaintiffs have alleged that Ventralex hernia repair mesh, manufactured out of plastic polypropylene, has defects. After a month-long trial against its manufacturers, the jury delivered a verdict against them. The court ordered C.R. Bard Inc., a subsidiary of Becton, Dickinson and Co., to pay $4.8 million to the plaintiff, a man who experienced severe complications after the mesh was implanted. He said that the Ventralex hernia mesh embedded itself into his tissue, and that as a result of severe pain and inflammation, he needed to undergo corrective surgery.

Around 17,000 hernia mesh cases have been consolidated in a multidistrict litigation in federal court, while others are consolidated in state court in Rhode Island. In connection with hernia mesh, the company faces over 30,000 suits similar to the one that went to trial. Nevertheless is has announced it plans to appeal.

Continue reading →

Published on: August 22, 2022

Epoch Everlasting Play’s Fabric Playhouse Does Not Meet Flammability Standards

By Moll Law Group

girls-g49ab55249_640 Recently, Epoch Everlasting Play announced that certain fabric playhouses and play tents don’t meet the industry flammability standard for children’s tents. Due to this failure, children across the country who use these tents are at risk of burn injuries. Approximately 251,600 fabric playhouses and tents in the United States were recalled voluntarily on July 28, 2022. The recall occurred under CPSC’s Fast Track Recall process. With this process, a company dedicates itself to working with the agency to not only announce a product recall but also develop a remedy. If your child was burned while using an Epoch Everlasting Play fabric house or tent, you should call the experienced Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Consult Moll Law Group About Your Play Tent Claim

The recalled playhouses and tents were made of mesh and nylon. Nylon storage bags are sold with them. Each tent and playhouse is about 36 inches by 54 inches. A label is sewn into the underside of the playhouse or tent; it says, “Epoch Everlasting Play.” These $30-$35 recalled products were sold at a range of toy stores and online, including at www.amazon.com, www.fatbraintoys, www.zulily.com, Target, Marshall’s and Toys R Us for several years, from March 2014 through March 2022.

The recall was conducted voluntarily by Epoch Everlasting Play under CPSC’s Fast Track Recall process. Fast Track recalls are initiated by firms, who commit to work with CPSC to quickly announce the recall and remedy to protect consumers. The play tents Epoch recalled include these models:

Pop Up Theater Tent,
Kidoozie Ice Castle Tent,
King Size Medieval Castle,
My Clubhouse,
Pirate Den Playhouse,
Royal Castle Playhouse.
Pop Up Theater Tent (Red),
Princess Hideaway Playhouse

Continue reading →

Published on: August 15, 2022

Mylan Pharmaceuticals Voluntarily Recalls Insulin Glargine Injection Pens

By Moll Law Group

woman-g38859c667_640 Early in July, Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. voluntarily recalled a batch of its prefilled Insulin Glargine Injection pens that come in 100 units/mL, 3 mL. The pens include an insulin analog that is long-acting. Doctors prescribe it for glycemic controls in both adults and children who have type 1 or type diabetes. If you were injured or a loved one was lost due to uncontrolled blood sugar while using Insulin Glargine Injection pens or another type of insulin injection pen, you should call the experienced Chicago-based product liability lawsuits of Moll Law Group to see whether you have a viable claim. Billions have been recovered in lawsuits with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Insulin Injection Pen Claim

The pens in questions are packed five pens to a carton and sold to patients with diabetes. The carton includes information about the product, batch number, and the date the pens expire. The manufacturer recalled a batch that omitted a label on certain pens. Due to this lack of labeling, a patient could mix up the products and strengths of the unbranded pens. This, in turn, could lead to insufficient glycemic control, and either excessively high or low blood sugar.

Biocon Sdn. Bhd made the affected pens, which are not branded and are interchangeable with biosimilar Insulin Glargine-yfgn pens. They affected pens were distributed by Mylan Specialty L.P in the United States between April 4 – May 5, 2022. The branded Semglee injection pen is not affected. While no adverse events have been reported so far, serious harm could be experienced by a patient who needs to control his or her insulin.

Continue reading →

Published on: August 8, 2022

Banana Boat Hair and Scalp Sunscreen Spray Has Been Recalled

By Moll Law Group

flowers-g80f4db707_640 Edgewell Personal Care Company, which makes Banana Boat sunscreen, has voluntarily recalled several batches of its hair and scalp sunscreen spray after trace amounts of benzene were found in it. Benzene is known to cause cancer. The manufacturer has stated that benzene isn’t an ingredient in the spray. Rather benzene developed unexpectedly in the propellant that sprays the product from its can. Certain samples of the Banana Boat Hair & Scalp Sunscreen Spray SPF 30 contain the chemical. If you or a loved one were harmed by sunscreen recalled by Banana Boat, the experienced product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group can help you figure out whether you should sue for damages. Billions have been recovered in product liability claims with which we’ve been involved.

Call the Seasoned Moll Law Group About Your Claim

The affected sunscreen sprays were packaged in aerosol cans and distributed across the U.S., both in-person and online. Affected sunscreen products had specific expiration dates; you can identify them according to their lot code numbers.

The manufacturer’s spokesperson has stated that no other Banana Boat sunscreen for hair and scalp is part of the recall and that these products can continue to be used safely and as intended. The sunscreen spray was packaged in aerosol cans and distributed across the country. Its expiration dates were in December 2022, February 2023, and April 2024. From the company’s perspective, the recall is being taken out of an abundance of caution.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 26, 2022

RIO-Branded Hammock Chairs Have Been Recalled

By Moll Law Group

hammock-g98c17b6cc_640-e1656952435126 Recently, RIO-branded swinging hammock chairs were recalled. When pins are not properly inserted, the chair’s legs can collapse such that the user is injured. Around 786,000 units of this type of hammock, which have black or gray metal frames and fabric seats, were recalled. If you have a hammock that is navy, gray, red or camouflage, you should check to see who the manufacturer is by looking below the pillow. The affected hammocks have “RIO” printed below the pillow. Only chairs with warning tags on the back of an armrest or backrest are included in a recall. You should call ShelterLogic Group, which makes the hammock, to receive instruction on verifying proper insertion pins. Additionally, if you were injured, you should call the experienced Chicago product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Talk to Moll Law Group About Whether You Have a Claim

ShelterLogic Group owns RIO Brands, which makes the affected hammock chairs. The recall was prompted by ShelterLogic Group’s 24 reports of incidents that resulted in injuries like concussions, bruises, aches and pains, head lacerations, and abrasions sustained by consumers that fell while using the chair. If you sustained any of these or catastrophic injuries, you should consult our experienced lawyers about whether you can bring a product liability lawsuit. While the injuries reported so far in connection with these particular hammocks have been minor, more catastrophic injuries are associated with hammocks and swing chairs that result in falls.

Hammocks may be defective in terms of their design, manufacturing, or marketing. In the case of hammocks in which the pin is not properly inserted, it is likely there is a design or manufacturing flaw. Design flaws include errors in the specifications by which the product was made; these are flaws that occur in every unit of the product. Manufacturing errors are deviations from the specifications or plans for how the product should be put together. It is often necessary to retain an expert to take a look at the product and determine whether there is a design or manufacturing flaw and to testify in a product liability lawsuit.

Continue reading →