Procter & Gamble Faces Suit From Woman Who Suffered Burns From Tide Pod Tucked in Her Bra
A New Jersey woman says in a lawsuit that she suffered chemical burns from the rupture of a Tide Pods detergent capsule that she stashed in her bra to keep it away from her kids.
March 09, 2018 at 04:38 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New Jersey Law Journal
Tide Pods. Photo: Shutterstock
A New Jersey woman says in a lawsuit that she suffered chemical burns from the rupture of a Tide Pods detergent capsule that she stashed in her bra to keep it away from her kids.
The brightly colored Tide Pods are said to resemble candy, and since their introduction in 2012, some children and adults have been hospitalized after ingesting them. Recently a bizarre internet meme has surfaced showing teenagers eating the laundry product in videos posted online.
So when Dana Arevalo of Paterson discovered her children playing with a Tide Pod, she immediately confiscated it. With nowhere else to put it that was out of the children's reach, she tucked it into her bra, then headed to the laundry room to put it away. But before she got to the laundry room, the capsule broke and spilled its contents, causing her to suffer chemical burns, her suit claims.
The burns resulted in permanent injuries, pain and suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life, and the plaintiff will be forced to expend money for medical and hospital treatment, the suit claims.
Arevalo brings claims for strict liability, products liability, latent defects, breach of warranty and failure to warn from Procter & Gamble, the maker of Tide Pods. She seeks compensatory and punitive damages, attorney fees and costs of suit.
The injury took place on Oct. 4, 2015, and Arevalo's suit was filed in state court in Passaic on Sept. 27, 2017. Procter & Gamble was served with the suit on Feb. 9 of this year and it removed the case to federal court on March 9.
While most attention has focused on the dangers of ingesting the contents of Tide Pods, they can cause significant injury to the skin, according to a September 2014 article from the Journal of Medical Toxicology. While such burns do not appear to be immediately life-threatening, they require hospital admission and conscious sedation for the purpose of wound care and debridement, the journal said. But conscious sedation, while a safe procedure, brings the risk of complications, the journal said.
And the magazine Consumer Reports said in July 2015 that it would no longer recommend laundry detergent pods because of their safety risks.
Arevalo's lawyer, Marisa Dominguez of Ricci, Fava & Bagley in Totowa, New Jersey, did not return a call about the case. Procter & Gamble is represented by H. Lockwood Miller III of Goldberg Segalla in Newark. He also did not return a call about the case.
Procter & Gamble faces a similar suit in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Dotel v. Procter & Gamble Manufacturing. In that case, which is still pending according to court documents, plaintiff Jennifer Dotel claims she suffered scarring to her left breast from an accident while using Tide Pods.
Dotel, of Northampton, Pennsylvania, was doing her laundry while wearing a bra without a blouse in October 2014 when she opened the container of Tide Pods and attempted to remove one. Several of the pods had stuck together, making it necessary for her to separate them before using them to launder her clothing, according to her suit. As she was separating the pods, one of them ruptured and discharged its contents in a stream, striking the plaintiff on the left breast, her suit claims.
Dotel's suit said she will need plastic surgery to achieve a full recovery.
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 AllTravis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readLegal Speak's 'Sidebar with Saul' Part IV: Deliberations Begin in First Trump Criminal Trial
1 minute readJosh Partington of Snell & Wilmer Is in Fact a Rock Star in the Office (and Out of It)
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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