Pressure Cooker Explosion That Severely Burned Toddler Nets $27M Settlement
Most Effective Lawyers: Products liability — The law firm did its own testing before discovering an unreported change in manufacturing hid a flaw in a pressure cooker that seriously injured a 2-year-old girl.
December 10, 2018 at 05:00 AM
2 minute read
John Uustal, Michael Hersh and Catherine Darlson
Kelley/Uustal
The Consumer Product Safety Commission, police and firefighters found no defect in a pressure cooker after a toddler suffered debilitating burns that required amputations.
A pressure cooker burst beside 2-year-old Samantha Gonzalez when her grandmother was bathing her in the kitchen sink in 2015.
After public agencies found no fault with the kitchen appliance, Kelley/Uustal hired engineering experts — who reached the same conclusion.
Attorneys John Uustal, Michael Hersh and Catherine Darlson thought they had reached a dead end until they noted Samantha's father reported slipping on liquid outside the kitchen.
“Why would there be liquid on the floor outside the kitchen?” Uustal asked. They inspected the kitchen, reviewed police photos again and noticed tiny food particles scattered all over the kitchen, especially the ceiling.
They concluded the pressure cooker opened under pressure. Reviewing the evidence again, they found a neighbor reported hearing the grandmother shouted, “It exploded! It exploded!” Police photos showed the pressure cooker was open.
The legal team concluded the pressure cooker release valve activated by mistake, causing Samantha's grandmother to grab the pressure cooker. A split-second later, the device exploded and shot into the sink.
Additional testing by the law firm's own laboratory and testing staff, who found the pressure cooker had the wrong size internal lockbar, which meant the lock didn't actually lock.
The company fixed the problem after the first three years of manufacturing without reporting the change, which meant the comparison devices used in the testing were not defective.
The defendant's engineering expert conceded the defect in Samantha's case, which settled for $27 million. She lost a leg including one hip, a foot and all of her fingers. The funds will cover medical care, including plastic surgery and technologically advanced prosthetics.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInternational Investment and Dispute Resolution in the Wake of Mexico’s Dramatic Judicial Reform
5 minute readRevenue Sharing Enhances the Benefits of Community Development Districts to Developers and Local Governments
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Bankruptcy Judge to Step Down in 2025
- 2Justices Seek Solicitor General's Views on Music Industry's Copyright Case Against ISP
- 3Judge to hear arguments on whether Google's advertising tech constitutes a monopoly
- 4'Big Law Had Become Too Woke': Why Bill Barr Moved On
- 5Manhattan US Attorney Damian Williams Announces Resignation From Office
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250