MINNESOTA TOYOTA ACCELERATOR ATTORNEYS

MINNESOTA PRODUCT LIABILITY ATTORNEYS DISCUSS THE TOYOTA RECALLS

By now, everyone has heard about the Toyota recalls for sticky accelerators on a number of Toyota vehicles, including the Prius and the Camry. Here is a list of vehicles Toyota has recalled recently, according to Toyota on its web-site:

2005-2010 Avalon
2010 Prius
2007-2010 Camry
2009-2010 RAV4
2009-2010 Corolla
2008-2010 Sequoia
2008-2010 Highlander
2005-2010 Tacoma
2009-2010 Matrix
2007-2010 Tundra
2004-2009 Prius
2009-2010 VENZA

If you own one of these vehicles, the Minnesota Toyota recall lawyers at Champion Law recommend that you stop driving the vehicle and take it to a dealer immediately. We have seen first hand how Toyota's irresponsibility has changed lives forever. So please do not take a chance. Stop driving your Toyota and have it serviced.

The automobile defect product liability lawyers at Champion Law are investigating cases against Toyota for sticky accelerators. Some of these vehicles were not recalled. And while our investigation continues, our thinking now is that they should have been.

So why wouldn't Toyota recall all vehicles potentially affected by the bad accelerator designs? The answer may be simple: money. New reports show Toyota bragging about saving money by "negotiating" with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to reach a deal that would cost less money. http://www.startribune.com/business/84903772.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUr.

If you have any questions about Toyota accelerators, brakes or any other potential defect, contact a Minnesota product liability lawyer at Champion Law by calling us at 1-800-I-AM-HURT, 651.766.5886 or by visiting the Champion Law web-site.

ST. PAUL PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEYS DISCUSS PERSONAL WATER CRAFT OR JET SKI HAZARDS - PART 3

MINNESOTA PRODUCT LIABILITY LAWYERS SPEAK OUT ON WHAT MANUFACTUERS OF PERSONAL WATER CRAFTS AND JET SKIS SHOULD BE DOING TO KEEP YOU AND YOUR FAMILY SAFE

In my last two entries, I discussed the problem of body cavity injuries the can occur if a person - usually a passenger - falls of the back of a jet ski or personal water craft into the jet wash. I also discussed how including fine print warnings on the back of the jet ski doesn't fix the problem and won't, in my opinion, absolve the manufacturer of product liability claims.

So what should a manufacturer do? There are a few simple and cost effective answers. First, manufacturers should install seat-backs on the back of these multi-passnger crafts. The seatbacks don't have to extend up two feet. Many manufacturers, including Yamaha and Kawasaki, are using shorter seat-backs on some of their crafts that help to keep passengers from falling off the back. These seat-backs should, in my opinion, be on every mulit-passenger craft.

Second, most of these jet skis just don't have a good place for the passenger to hold on. They should have grab handles on the sides of the seats that are easy to find and hold on to.

And last, all personal water crafts have to have a lanyard that attaches to passengers as well as the driver. If the driver falls off, the lanyard pulls from the machine and cuts the engine. For years, manufacturers have been saying that lanyards don't work for passengers because they don't cut the engine quickly enough to avoid body cavity injuries. Of course, with the money they've spent defending their designs, they may have been able to develop a lanyard shut off switch that could have solved the problem.

If you need to speak with a personal water craft or jet ski attorney, call product liability lawyer, Nate Bjerke of Champion Law in St. Paul, Minnesota at 651.766.5886.

ST. PAUL PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEYS DISCUSS PERSONAL WATER CRAFT OR JET SKI HAZARDS - PART 2

MINNESOTA PRODUCT LIABILITY LAWYERS WANT YOU TO KNOW HOW TO KEEP YOUR FAMILY SAFE ON PERSONAL WATER CRAFTS AND JET SKIS


In my last blog entry, I discussed the potential for horrific orifice injuries that can happen if a person falls off the back of a personal water craft or jet ski. People who fall off the back often land on their back with their feet up in the air, leaving themselves open to the jet thrust of water that propels these crafts. The injuries are life changing and can literally rip out a persons insides. So why do these injuries happen? Because manufacturers have ignored one of the most basic rules of product design.

THE DESIGN TRILOGY
In designing products and Minnesota product liability law, there is a long-held axiom that manufacturers must analyze the potential product for hazards. After identifying the hazards, the designer or manufacturer must then follow a three step process: 1) determine if it is feasible to eliminate the hazard by simply designing it out of the product; 2) if the hazard cannot be designed out of the product, there should be a guard installed. An example is a guard on a punch press or other industrial equipment that prevents users from getting their hands caught in dangreous areas of the machine; and 3) if it is not feasible to either design out the hazard or guard against it, the manufacturer must warn users about the hazard.

Unfortunately, many manufacturers of personal water crafts and jet skis have moved straight to the third option and left a dangerous design that allows people to fall off the back of the crafts into the jet wash. They use fine-print warnings like the one shown above.

In the next entry of this blog, I will discuss the things manufacturers of personal water craft and jet skis should be doing to eliminate this hazard.

If you have any questions about Minnesota product liability law, personal water craft lawsuits or jet ski lawsuits, visit the Champion Law web-site or call product liability attorney, Nate Bjerke, at 651.766.5886.

ST. PAUL PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEYS DISCUSS PERSONAL WATER CRAFT (JET SKI) INJURIES UNKNOWN TO MOST MINNESOTANS

MINNESOTA PRODUCT LIABILITY LAWYERS WANT YOU TO KNOW HOW TO KEEP YOUR FAMILY SAFE ON PERSONAL WATER CRAFTS AND JET SKIS



A largely unknown risk of riding personal water crafts like the one shown here relates to falling off the back of the craft. If riders of these jet skis are not wearing wet-suits or other protective clothing and they fall off the back, they can suffer serious internal injuries from the personal water craft's jet propulsion. The water stream created by the craft can thrust water into the person's orifices, causing devastating injuries.



Manufacturers like Polaris, Sea Doo and Kawasaki have known about this danger for years. In response, they starting placing warning labels warning of "orifice injuries" on the back of these products (in tiny print) and in owner's manuals since about 2002. But these warnings just aren't effective. First, they often aren't read - especially by passengers who are likely to be on the back of these personal water crafts. Second, if they are read, the odds of a passenger having a wet-suit handy are slim.



So what should the manufacturer's do? I'll discuss that issue in my next blog entry.



If you have questions about a personal water craft or jet ski injury, contact a Minnesota product liabilty lawyer like me, Nate Bjerke, of Champion Law LLC at 651.766.5886.

ST. PAUL ATTORNEYS DISCUSS HONDA AIRBAG RECALL THAT WILL AFFECT MINNESOTANS

ST. PAUL PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEYS DISCUSS IMPORTANT AIRBAG SAFETY NEWS FOR MINNESOTANS WHO OWN HONDA CIVICS AND ACCORDS

Honda is recalling model year 2001 Civic and Accord vehicles after determining that the driver's airbag inflator could produce excessive internal pressure. If an affected airbag deploys, the increased internal pressure may cause the inflator to rupture. If this happens, metal fragments could pass through the air bag cushion material, leaving the driver vulnerable to shrapnel type injuries.

If you have a 2001 Honda Civic or Accord, take the vehicle in to a Honda dealer who will replace the airbag inflator, free of charge.

If you have questions about airbags defects or other vehicle safety defects, contact Minnesota automobile product liability lawyer Nate Bjerke of Champion Law LLC who knows the industry secrets. Give us a call at 651.766.5886 or log onto our personal injury and product liability web-site. We'll be happy to answer your questions, free of charge.

• Click here to view the federal government's synopsis of the recall.
• Search the federal governments list of recalled vehicles.

MINNESOTA PRODUCT LIABILITY LAWYERS DISCUSS RECENT BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE TIRE RECALL

The Minnesota product liability and tire defect lawyers Champion Law are spreading the word about a recent Bridgestone/Firestone tire recall.



Bridgestone is recalling 127,183 Firestone FR380 tires, size P235/75R15, manufactured from September 9, 2007 through July 2, 2008. These tires were produced with insufficient tread base gauge. Continued use of the subject tires may lead to vibration and groove cracking and eventually, tread separation. When the tread from a tire separates, the vehicle becomes extremely difficult to control. Tread separation was the basis for the product liability claims in the Ford/Firestone cases that received so much media attention several years ago. Tread separation often leads to rollovers, especially in trucks, vans and SUVs.



If you have Bridgestone/Firestone tires on your vehicle, check the tires to see if they fall within the recall range - the tire number is printed on the sidewall of each tire. If so, stop driving on these tires and get to a Bridgesone/Firestone tire dealership for a free replacement. For more information on this recall, visit the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration's web-site.



The Minnesota tire defect lawyers at Champion Law haven't just talked about or studied tire defects, we've told the tire defect story to real people in jury boxes. If you have questions about a Bridgestone/Firestone tire defect or recall, call us at 651.766.5886 or visit our web-site for more free information.

NEW BRIGHTON DROWING - WERE SAFETY RULES BROKEN?

I have a five and a six year old. And I've taken them to Long Lake Beach in New Brighton many times - its the beach where I used to swim when I was in high school. So it hit especially close to home last week when a young boy drown at the beach on a school outing.

Reports state that six-year-old Kyarke (Jackie) Lah set out to swim from shore to the swimming raft and never made it. A lifeguard spotted Lah as he struggled in a designated corridor between the shallow swimming area and the raft. Rescuers called 911, but Lah was unresponsive when they pulled him from 8 feet of water several minutes later. He later died at Gillette Children's Hospital in St. Paul.

By Thursday afternoon, the rafts at Long Lake and Roseville's Lake Josephine, where a 16-year drowned Saturday evening, were gone for good.

We at Champion Law offer our sincerest condolences and prayers to the Lah family. If asked, I would counsel the family to hire an experience personal injury lawyer to investigate the cause of this tragedy.

As parents, this tragic case should serve as a harsh reminder for things to look for to keep our kids safe at the beach or pool.

First, it goes without saying that even if your child is a strong swimmer, kids get tired. They need breaks and constant supervision when they are in the water. If you're not sure about their ability in the water, make them wear a life vest.

Second, beware of swimming rafts. Swimming rafts like the one that was just removed at Long Lake are not nearly as common as they once were simply because they do pose a dangerous risk to weaker swimmers or young children. In fact, none of the public beaches run by Minneapolis, Washington County or the Three Rivers Park District have rafts, parks officials said Thursday. Nor do beaches at Lake Phalen in St. Paul or Lebanon Hills Regional Park in Dakota County.

Third, make sure there are enough life guards on duty for the popluation of people in the water. Reports in this case have varied from three to five lifeguards being on duty. But with more than 100 people in the water - many of whom were children - that may not have been enough.

And last, if you send your child to a beach or pool with a group, make absolutely certain there are enough adults supervising the trip. I have heard only rumors about the number of adult supervisors on the Long Lake trip, so I won't commment on whether the amount was adequate. But in my view, anything less than a 3:1 child to adult ratio is unacceptable.

For more information on this tragic story, click on the following links:

St. Paul Pioneer Press
Raft removed from Long Lake Beach
KARE 11
Star Tribune - are swimming rafts hazardous?