Educators who are accused of sexual assault and not ultimately convicted are actually protected through the current agreement that exists between the Clark County School District and the Teacher’s Union. “Local parents need to be made aware that when this happens, no documentation exists moving forward that the abuse ever occurred,” stressed Dennis Prince, Founder of Prince Law Group. “They must remain vigilant.” Click here to view full story.
The collective bargaining agreement between the Clark County School District and the teacher’s union actually protects educators accused of sexual assault. “If teachers involved in this predatory activity are not ultimately convicted of a crime, they can be transferred to a new school,” said Dennis Prince, Founder of Prince Law Group. “As a result, there will be no documents or records about the abuse that occurred.” Click here to view full story.
New legislation passed this year and signed into law by Governor Lombardo allows patients and families to place cameras inside patients’ rooms in assisted living homes and other healthcare facilities in Nevada. “This will allow for objective evidence in cases against these facilities,” said Dennis Prince, founder and lead trial counsel at Prince Law Group. “Without cameras, it’s essentially the patient’s word against the workers, right?” Click here to view full article.
Prince Law Group filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Clark County District Court on June 5, 2023 against the Fashion Show Mall on behalf of the Estate of Clarice Yamaguchi, deceased, and her surviving heirs. On New Year’s Eve 2021, Clarice and her husband, Robert Yamaguchi, were entering the Fashion Show mall from the covered parking lot when an assailant attempted to steal Clarice’s purse. Clarice was fatally wounded by the assailant’s gunfire. Click here to view full article.
Prince Law Group files complaint against Pacifica Senior Living Green Valley over death of dementia-afflicted resident in Henderson, Nevada. Click here to watch the full video.
Attorney Dennis Prince filed an ethics complaint on February 24, 2022 on behalf of Cheyenne Medical, LLC, which owns Thrive. The complaint accuses Commissioner Miller of making defamatory comments about the business and having “extensive conflicts of interests” because Miller’s law firm previously sued Thrive and represented a dozen of the company’s competitors. Click here to view full article.
Prince Law Group filed the complaint on February 9, 2022 on behalf of the family of Harry Kenneth Peterson III who was killed while operating the rock-crushing machine at a Henderson job site on February 5, 2021. The lawsuit accuses ASTEC of failing to design a jaw crusher machine that could safely rest in a “neutral position” or be disassembled. Dielco Crane Service was also named in the complaint for subjecting Mr. Peterson to “unreasonably dangerous work conditions.” Click here to view full article.
As most of you know, Amazon has been fighting products liability claims across the country for some time now. While the company has been successful at stopping a tidal wave of litigation from injured users in the past, a recent decision made in Wisconsin sided with the plaintiff.
In the case of State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122316, 2019 WL 3304887, the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin denied the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Amazon.com, Inc. (Amazon).
The court held that Amazon was so deeply involved with the transaction at issue that it was an entity that could be held strictly liable under Wisconsin law. It also held that 47 U.S.C. § 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) did not immunize Amazon because its liability was not based on posting content from a third party.
In State Farm, Luke Cain (Cain), who was insured by State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State Farm), purchased a bathtub faucet adapter from a third-party seller on Amazon.com. The third-party seller was XMJ, a Chinese company with no presence in the United States. A month after purchasing the item, the adapter failed due to a defect, causing flooding in Cain’s home. State Farm paid for repairs associated with the flooding and brought this subrogation action against Amazon.
Thereafter, Amazon filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that: 1) it was not a “seller” within the meaning of Wisconsin’s products liability statute, Wis. Stat. § 895.047; and 2) the CDA prohibited treating it as a “publisher” of third-party content posted on its website.
In its analysis, the court looked at several key facts about XMJ’s relationship with Amazon and Amazon’s services to Cain as the purchaser. It noted that Amazon provided payment processing and guaranteed the purchases. It also highlighted that XMJ participated in Amazon’s Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) program, pursuant to which Amazon stored XMJ’s products and fulfilled its orders. Amazon also required XMJ to register its products for sale and reserved the right to refuse registration. In addition, Amazon required XMJ to indemnify Amazon for any injury or property damage caused by XMJ’s products.
Upon analyzing the applicability of the Wisconsin strict liability statute, Wis. Stat. § 895.047(2), the court easily determined that the unknown manufacturer would be liable and that it was not subject to process in Wisconsin. Thus, the only question remaining was whether the plaintiff could recover from Amazon in the manufacturer’s absence. The court disagreed with Amazon’s argument that it could not be held liable as a seller because it never took title to the product.
Instead, the court held that Wisconsin’s statute does not restrict liability for defective products to a narrow class such as sellers or distributors. Rather, the statute limits the circumstances under which a plaintiff can hold a non-manufacturing defendant liable. Because the court found that Amazon took on more than a peripheral role in putting the defective product into the stream of commerce, the court held that State Farm could hold Amazon liable as a seller or distributor.
The court also declined to apply the immunity provided in the CDA to Amazon.
The CDA provides immunity to interactive computer services from claims based on content written and provided by third parties. Since the products liability claim at issue was not based on whether Amazon published XMJ’s product listing but, rather, on Amazon’s role in the chain of distribution, the court held that the CDA did not apply. Thus, the court denied Amazon’s motion for summary judgment. Soon after it did so, the parties settled the case.
This case is just one of several addressing the evolving status of Amazon as a product seller and its claim for immunity from products liability claims based on the CDA.
Although this case isn’t taking place in Nevada, it serves as a reminder of how important it is to obtain all of the facts regarding Amazon’s involvement in the posting, sale and shipment of the product at issue. The strength of a strict liability case against Amazon may likely dependent on several key elements specific to your case, such as the seller’s involvement in Amazon’s FBA program.
As more Amazon cases are decided and parties appeal to various courts, the evolution of Amazon’s products liability and CDA defenses is sure to continue.
If you or your client has been injured by a product you purchased from Amazon or any other business, call us to discuss your case. Our presence can drastically increase it’s value for you or your firm.
Millions of riders rely on ride-hailing services Uber and Lyft for daily transportation. But according to a Consumer Reports review of data from New York City and the Seattle area, a notable number of ride-hail vehicles registered for Uber and Lyft service, about 1 in 6, carry unaddressed safety defects.
Among the tens of thousands of Uber and Lyft vehicles registered to operate in New York City, there’s a 2011 Hyundai Sonata GLS with eight unaddressed safety recalls that range from a potential seat-belt detachment to even more alarming examples, such as possible engine failure.
“Uber and Lyft are letting down their customers and jeopardizing their trust,” says William Wallace, a CR safety policy advocate. “Uber’s website says people can ‘ride with confidence,’ while Lyft promises ‘peace of mind,’ yet both companies fail to ensure that rideshare cars are free from safety defects that could put passengers at risk.”
As Uber and Lyft announced becoming multibillion-dollar IPOs earlier this year, CR decided to check on the safety of the privately owned vehicles that are key to company operations and are now used by more than 100 million consumers.
CR reviewed safety records for about 94,000 vehicles registered as operating for the companies in NYC and King County, Wash. (home to Seattle), two major ride-hailing hubs with local governments that require drivers to register vehicles and obtain an additional license to work through regulators. The CR analysis of the data is meant to provide a snapshot of open safety recalls among ride-hailing cars in the industry, but it might not reflect the national market.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL REPORT ON THE CONSUMER AFFAIRS WEBSITE
About 72% of traumatic brain injury-related emergency department visits among children are attributable to consumer products, according to a study recently published in the journal Brain Injury earlier this year.
The study found that the top 10 leading products contributing to non-fatal traumatic brain injuries in children younger than a year to 19 years old are:
Traumatic brain injury or TBI occurs when a sudden trauma — such as a bump, blow or jolt — causes damage to the brain.
The new study involved national estimates of approximately 4.1 million non-fatal traumatic brain injuries in children and adolescents in the United States between 2010 and 2013. The data came from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System and the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-All Injury Program.
The data showed that the most common product groups related to TBIs in children were related to sports and recreation, which was linked to 28.8% of injuries; home furnishings and fixtures, tied to 17.2% of injuries; home structures and construction materials, tied to 17.1% of injuries; child nursery equipment, tied to 2.7% of injuries, and toys, tied to 2.4%, among other products.
Traumatic brain injuries from home furnishings and fixtures, primarily beds, were highest among infants and children up to 4 years old. Whereas traumatic brain injuries from sports and recreation — especially football, bicycles and basketball — were highest among children ages 5 to 19.
The new study had some limitations, including that the severity of these injuries were not investigated and the data included only patients admitted to emergency departments.
The researchers recommended strategies to prevent TBI in children around the home, including removing tripping hazards such as area rugs; improving lighting; avoiding hard surface playgrounds; increasing use of home safety devices such as stair gates; and using stairway handrails without sharp edges, among other strategies.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a set of guidelines last year for the diagnosis, treatment and long-term care of children and teens with traumatic brain injuries.
If you or your child has experienced a brain injury of any kind, contact us today to schedule some time to talk about your case. We can help you get your life back on track.