We are happy to announce that we're celebrating 30 years! →

REQUEST FREE CONSULTATION
Published on:

By

gardener-5384191_1280-e1718067539251On May 30, 2024, the manufacturer Black & Decker recalled its CRAFTSMAN® V20 Cordless Tillers/Cultivators because the instructions for its assembly could result in consumers incorrectly putting in the bottom part of the tiller upside-down. This can cause tines to rotate towards the person operating the tiller and present the risk of cuts. Around 44,400 units were recalled. If you were cut or dealt with lacerations from a tiller/cultivator, you should call the Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim

The tillers/cultivators in question were made in China and sold at Ace Hardware, Lowe’s, Amazon.com, Blain’s Farm and Fleet, and some Army & Air Force Exchanges between October ’22 – April 2024. The purchase price was $129-179. No injuries have been reported in connection with the recalled product thus far. The company has received a single report of incorrect attachment of the lower part of a cordless tiller/cultivator. Consumers have been asked to stop using these products and call Craftsman at (855) 237-6848 between 8 a.m. and 6.pm on weekdays or visit the Craftsman recall page. The company will provide new assembly instructions. The company is also contacting those it knows bought the product to give them instructions. This recall is similar to an earlier recall in May of Walk-Behind Leaf Blowers and Vacuums and Tow-Behind Leaf Vacuums, which also posed laceration risks.

If you’ve already been injured, you may want recourse, not simply new assembly instructions. It’s important to talk to our experienced product liability lawyers about your legal options. When you’ve been injured by a defective product, it may be appropriate to pursue damages against the manufacturer by filing a product liability lawsuit. These lawsuits are pursued when a product is defective in terms of its manufacturing, marketing, or design. In this case, since the assembly instructions were flawed, it’s possible that the court could find a marketing defect. Often defects must be proven with the assistance of expert witnesses.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

catheter-e1718067147367Bard PowerPort devices have been linked to serious injuries and deaths. As of May 2024, the Bard PowerPort Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) has increased by 189 cases. These lawsuits are consolidated in MDL 3081, or In re: Bard Implanted Port Catheter Products Liability Litigation before Judge G. Campbell. These lawsuits request financial compensation on the grounds that the catheters are defective and have injured them. The court rejected efforts to delay bellwether trials, which are expected to proceed according to schedule. Bellwether trials are a small group of lawsuits selected to be determined early, in order to predict the outcome in similar lawsuits in the MDL. If you were injured by an implanted Bard PowerPort, please call the Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group to learn your options. Billions have been recovered in lawsuits with which we’ve been involved and we represent clients around the country.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim Against Bard

The Bard PowerPort is a catheter device, implanted under a patient’s skin, used to put fluids or medicine directly into his or her veins. They are usually used in the course of medical IV therapy, including chemotherapy, and to give fluid to a patient. Bard PowerPorts are housed in titanium and plastic. They’re made with a polyurethane that combines barium sulfate and polyurethane. Bard Access Systems Inc., which Becton, Dickinson and Company’s subsidiary, makes this device.

The consolidated lawsuits against the manufacturer allege the catheter device is linked to defects and complications and can result in harm as severe as death due to its fractures and migrations, as well as infections, embolisms, blood clots, and thrombosis.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

atv-e1718066265390Off-highway vehicle use typically increases during the summer months. Recently, the Consumer Product Safety Commission issued its annual report about rising off-highway deaths and injuries. Among other things, the report revealed that minors under age 16, as well as adults between the ages of 45 and 54 have higher death rates in off-highway vehicles. Overall, there was a 33% increase in off-highway vehicle deaths in 2020 compared to 2019—these were the two most recent years for which there was data. Males were disproportionately affected. The CPSC chair Alex Hoehn-Saric has asked that safe riding be put first and that riders should wear a helmet with proper gear.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Off-Highway Vehicle Lawsuit

The CPSC report asks rider to take appropriate steps to avoid collisions. Leading causes of death in off-highway vehicles were crashes with other vehicles and stationary objects like trees. Often the occupants of vehicles would be thrown out of the vehicle during these collisions.

The report also informs us that children under age 12 constituted 44% of fatalities of children under 16. Additionally, adults older than 55 were affected; they made up 30% of related deaths.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

science-5314419_1280-e1718065686874-300x200Recently, the New Yorker ran a very important piece, reported by investigative journalist Sharon Lerner, in collaboration with ProPublica, with the headline “How 3M Discovered, Then Concealed the Dangers of Forever Chemicals.” 3M Corporation makes products like building materials and adhesives. The article tells the story of Kris Hansen, a chemist at 3M, who was asked by her boss, Jim Johnson, to test human blood to see if it had been contaminated with fluorochemicals, manmade compounds that are found in a number of 3M products including Scotchgard and firefighting foam. Unbeknownst to Hansen, Johnson had made several discoveries about the contaminants years before in some cases, he’d been directed to do the work by 3M’s lawyers.

Call Chicago-Based Attorneys of Moll Law Group If Forever Chemicals Harmed You

At that time, Johnson told Hansen that PFOS, one of these fluorochemicals, often entered the bloodstream of workers in the 3M factory but didn’t harm them. However, Johnson had also been told that an outside lab kept finding contaminants in blood samples from the American Red Cross, taken from the general population who shouldn’t have had those contaminants present.

Hansen’s job then was to figure out whether the lab had erred in its findings. In testing, she, too, found that PFOS was in the sample, which was from someone who hadn’t worked for the company; the other samples she and her team tested were also contaminated. She told her boss, but subsequently found that her warnings about the contamination were left out of official meeting notes.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

wardrobe-5961193_640-e1715228497204-300x200Recently around 1.6 million Black+Decker garment steamers were recalled by Empower Brands in a major expansion of an earlier recall of 518,500 units because of the risk of burns. Now all Black+Decker Model HGS011 Easy Garment Steamers have been recalled, including those that had been repaired as part of the earlier recall. You can identify the affect garment steamers because they have BLACK+DECKER printed at the base of the steamer, which is 11 by 6 inches. Each steamer has a model number printed on the bottom as well as on the sides of its package, and you should check to see whether you have an affected model. The affected models are HGS011, HGS011F, HGS011S, HGS011T. Packages with these UPC codes, printed on the package, are affected: 0 50875 82840 7, 0 50875 82839 1, 0 50875 82838 4, and 0 50875 00272 2. If you were burned by a Black+Decker garment steamer or another steamer, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in lawsuits with which we’ve been involved.

Consult Moll Law Group About Your Black+Decker Burn Claim

People have reported they were burned by the affected steamers. However, people also reported that they suffered injuries due to steamers that had previously been recalled in 2022 and repaired with a replacement upper assembly. Specifically, there have been 317 reports of hot water coming out of the recalled steamers. Of those, 82 people have reported getting burned by the hot water, and of those that were burned, 7 people suffered second-degree burns. 94 of the reports, including of 19 burn injuries, involved units that had supposedly been repaired in the 2022 recall or in units that had an updated design.

The company has asked consumers to stop using the recalled steamers and to contact Empower Brands to obtain a full refund. However, if you were injured by the steamer, you may need further recourse and you may be wondering what to do. When a consumer is injured by a product made dangerous due to a manufacturing, design, or marketing defect, he or she can bring a product liability lawsuit against the manufacturer. The company could be held liable for injuries caused by the defective product under theories of negligence, strict liability, breach of warranty, breach of contract, statutory violations, or fraud, depending on the state laws and the circumstances. Often, strict liability provides the most straightforward theory of liability because it requires attorneys to prove only: (1) the product was defective, (2) the defects caused your injuries, and (3) the injuries resulted in damages.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

corona-6278444_6401-e1715227682690Manufacturer ResMed makes CPAP masks that contain magnets. These masks have varying coverage of a patient’s face. Recently, the company gave consumers updated instructions for using the masks and held a voluntary global field action to update its guide for these masks. The notification warned consumers of a potential magnetic interference when magnets in the ResMed masks are close to certain implants and medical devices in a patient’s body. The ResMed masks that contain magnets are considered safe when used in line with the updated instructions for use and the field safety notice. If you were harmed by a ResMed mask with a magnet, or another medical mask containing a magnet, you should consult the experienced Chicago-based product liability attorneys of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim

Masks with magnets that were listed in the notice from the manufacturer include AirFit N10, AirFit F20, AirTouch F20, AirFit N20, AirTouch N20, AirFit F30, AirFit F30i. You can locate your mask’s model number on its frame or cushion. Affected masks include full face masks, non-vented masks, and nasal masks used to provide positive airway pressure therapy; they have magnets that make it easier for users to adjust the masks’ fit. The notice to consumers was issued because the masks not only potentially interrupt the function of some medical implants, but because they can also move the implant, whether a stent or a cranial plate or another device, within the patients’ bodies, causing serious injuries and necessitating additional, likely expensive medical care.

The affected ResMed masks were sold around the country and the world from 2014 to November 2023. The company has submitted to authorities five reports they received in which there was either medical intervention or hospitalization necessary that may have been related to magnetic interference of a mask with an implanted device. So far, users have not reported deaths or serious, permanent injuries.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

baby-21998_6401-e1715227048293Public concern is growing that weighted infant sleepwear, including sleep sacks and swaddles, may be dangerous for babies, after warnings from medical experts, safe-sleep advocates and federal regulators. In response, Amazon, Target and Walmart pulled this sleepwear from their sites and shelves. A senator has called for investigation into Dreamland Baby and Nested Bean, two of the popular weighted infant sleepwear companies based on allegations that they’ve used deceptive marketing in connection with product safety. It’s terrifying to discover your baby has been injured by a product you believed was safe. If your baby was injured by weighted infant sleepwear, call trustworthy Chicago-based product liability lawyers Moll Law Group.

Consult Moll Law Group About Weighted Infant Sleepwear Claims

Experts and regulators concerned about the weighted sleepwear believe that it could prevent babies from breathing and pumping blood, and that the sleepwear could harm a baby as he or she is developing. Additionally, they think that the sleepwear is heavy enough that it could stop an infant from waking themselves up in case they aren’t able to breathe. This group thinks the product needs rigorous safety testing prior to being made available on the market.

However, the manufacturers’ CEOs have stated that their products are safe and that there’s no evidence to the contrary; investigators are concerned that there’s no evidence of safety either. The marketing for these products has focused on their comforting and soothing effects on newborns. Nested Bean has sold more than 2.5 million units of sleepwear products. The Dreamland Baby product has been out for more than 10 years, and more than 1 million weighted units have been sold.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

baby-218149_640-e1712684043871Thousands of parents have sued both Mead Johnson and Abbott for defects in their formula. In a recent landmark jury verdict, Mead Johnson, the baby formula manufacturer who makes Enfamil, including Enfamil Premature Nutrition Products, was recently found liable for placing premature infants at greater risk for deadly diseases. Along with Abbott, it had denied that the Enfamil products caused NEC or the risk of it in premature infants and denied that there is a link between NEC and cow’s milk formula.  The jury in this case awarded the plaintiff mother $60 million—$35 million more than what was requested. If your baby was harmed by Mead Johnson formula, call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Consult Moll Law Group About Your Baby Formula Lawsuit

The litigation was pursued partly to alter the way preemies in the NICU are fed. The formula believed to cause NEC that was the subject of the trial was made using cow’s milk. In court filings responding to the lawsuits, Mead Johnson has written: “Mead Johnson denies that Enfamil products cause NEC or increase risks of NEC in infants.” The jury found that the manufacturer had not done enough to provide warnings to parents of increased odds of these infants suffering a deadly disease because they were given Mead Johnson’s formula Necrotizing Enterocolitis or NEC.

The case against Mead Johnson was brought by a mother who’d lost one of her twin preemies; it was made part of a multidistrict litigation. Over 330 lawsuits were filed around the country regarding the formula at issue. The trial started on February 20 and lasted four weeks. At closing arguments, the mother’s attorney called upon jurors to make the right decision after hearing from a dozen expert neonatologists, all of whom agreed that while the research about the formula was inclusive, using the formula increased the risk of NEC. It was also argued on closing that the company doesn’t warn pediatricians and parents about how serious the dangers are on its packaging or its marketing to doctors.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

hospital-840135_640-e1715226572404Around 15 million Philips Respironics CPAP and ventilator machines were impacted by a Class 1 recall. This class of recall is the most serious because it indicates that it’s reasonably probable that using or just being exposed to the affected products will result in serious adverse health ramifications or even deaths. Recently, the manufacturer Philips reached a $1.1 billion deal to settle claims from plaintiffs who alleged they were injured by the company’s CPAP sleep apnea machines, as well as BiPAP ventilators. Part of the settlement is expected to be allocated for medical monitoring. This settlement does not admit fault and it is not yet final; the deal was reached through a mediator and still needs to be formalized in federal court. If you were injured or a loved one died as a result of using a Philips CPAP sleep apnea machine, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group to see whether you have recourse. Billions have been recovered in lawsuits with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your CPAP Claim

The Philips CPAP machine recall occurred because thousands of CPAP users complained of suffering medical problems as a result of use. A subsequent investigation found that the polyurethane foam that had been used to muffle sound and vibration in the machine could break down, especially in a warm environment, such that the person using the device could breathe in bits of foam or chemicals from the foam, including formaldehyde and other volatile organic compounds, that they couldn’t see. That exposure could result in toxic and carcinogenic impacts. It is expected that the impacted machines will be fixed by replacing the existing foam with a silicone-based foam.

The affected Philips CPAP devices were sold between 2008-2021. More than 116,000 medical device reports had been received since April 2021, including 561 reports of death, that were suspected to be connected to the insulating foam in the machines.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

surgery-1822458_6401-e1712683689856Surgical mesh products are used to repair and reinforce soft tissue in patients where the tissue has some weakness. In particular, mesh is used to help reinforce the hernia. However, doctors have increasingly been using surgical mesh products, even though the safety and effectiveness in breast surgery hasn’t yet been decided.  The United States Food and Drug Administration has informed doctors, nurses and other health care providers that it is imposing new labeling updates for Becton, Dickinson and Company mesh products. These products include the following: GalaFLEX Lite Scaffold, GalaFLEX Scaffold, GalaFLEX 3D Scaffold, GalaFLEX 3DR Scaffold, Phasix ST Mesh, Phasix Plug and Patch, Phasix ST Mesh with Open Positioning System (OPS), and Phasix ST Mesh with Echo 2 Positioning System. If you were injured by any of these types of surgical mesh products, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers Moll Law Group.

Consult Moll Law Group About Surgical Mesh

The FDA issued its letter to ensure that doctors, nurses, and hospitals knew that Becton, Dickinson and Company had been asked to update its labels. The company did update its product warnings to indicate that surgical mesh products haven’t been determined to be safe and effective for purposes of breast surgeries. Health care providers have been asked to read the warnings.

However, if you are asymptomatic after mesh was used in your surgery, the FDA has not recommended that the mesh be removed or operated upon. The FDA has called for clinical evaluations to figure out whether the mesh products have benefit when they’re used for breast surgery. It also commented on the lack of clinical evaluations at a General and Plastic Surgery Devices Panel in 2019.

Continue reading →

Contact Information
180 N Stetson Ave 35th Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
T 312.462.1700F 312.756.0045E info@molllawgroup.com
We represent people nationwide including, but not limited to, those in the following localities: Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Dallas–Fort Worth, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Bernardino-Riverside, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, St. Louis, Tampa–St. Petersburg, and Washington, D.C.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Moll Law Group
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design