Photo: Jason Doiy

A Philadelphia jury has found in favor of equipment manufacturer Stihl in a products liability case filed by a man who claimed he suffered several strokes because a strap from a backpack-mounted leaf blower pinched his carotid artery.

The 12-person jury handed up its verdict Nov. 14, concluding a trial that had started in late October.

According to plaintiff Gary Pennington's complaint, the design of the Stihl BR 600 Magnum leaf blower was defective.

Pennington's complaint included counts of negligence, breach of warranty, and two counts of strict liability.

"The equipment as designed, manufactured, sold, and distributed was defective because the shoulder straps were inadequate to safely use the equipment in that the materials used and/or the straps' position on the backpack and/or the backpack design itself place significant unsafe and dangerous forces on the neck which can, and in this instance, did occlude and dissect plaintiff's carotid artery," the complaint said.

However, in its motion for summary judgment, Stihl argued that the plaintiff had a lack of expert testimony in his favor, including contradictory testimony from his own doctor.

"Obviously recognizing his need for expert testimony on this issue and facing the devastating testimony from his treating neurologist that backpack straps cannot in and of themselves cause arterial dissection, plaintiff retained Elliott A. Schulman M.D. to try to establish the requisite causal connection," the motion for summary judgment said. "Unfortunately for plaintiff, however, Dr. Schulman is unable to satisfy the requirements for admissible expert testimony. He could offer nothing more than an unfounded and conclusory statement of causation that falls short of plaintiff's burden of proof on the issue of causation."

The defendant further attacked Schulman's analysis as "devoid of scientific authority."

"This is not surprising, because no report exists in any medical or scientific literature of a backpack blower strap of any kind causing an arterial dissection—not even an anecdotal report, much less a scientific study drawing some causal connection between a backpack strap and a dissection," the defendant's court papers said. "Either failing to research the issue, or perhaps because he did, Dr. Schulman did not even bother to examine plaintiff or review his diagnostic studies, let alone cite any supporting literature or conduct any kind of independent study."

Stewart Cohen and Jonathan Rubinstein of Cohen, Placitella & Roth represent the plaintiff.

"We think we put on a strong case, we were pleased to have the opportunity to try it to verdict," Rubinstein said. "We're respectful of the jury's decision after three days of deliberation."

As for an appeal, Rubinstein said, "We are taking it under consideration."

McGuireWoods litigation partner Justin Howard led the trial team for Stihl.

"We are grateful to the jurors for their careful consideration throughout the trial," Howard said in an email. "Stihl is a valued client and our team was proud to represent the company in this matter."