A police officer was shot in the back with his service revolver by his three-year-old son. His injuries rendered him a paraplegic. He sued the manufacturers and sellers of his gun and holster, asserted products liability claims. He argued that the gun was defective because it lacked a safety mechanism to prevent accidental firing and had a light trigger pull. The appeals court ruled that summary judgment for the defendant gun manufacturer and retailer was improper on a design defect claim. The defendants failed to show that the plaintiff had no evidence that the alleged design defect caused his injuries. An expert witness for the plaintiff stated the opinion that a small child's hand would not have the leverage or size to depress a grip safety had the gun had one, and at the same time extend his finger far enough out to pull the trigger. The court upheld summary judgment on claims related to the holster, and against the gun's manufacturer and retailer for failure to warn the plaintiff that the gun should only be used with specific holsters, since the plaintiff was a sophisticated user. Chavez v. Glock, Inc., #B230346, 2012 Cal. App. Lexis 832  (Cal. App.).
      The U.S. Justice Department has reached settlements for a total of over $61 million against ten companies that manufactured allegedly defective Zylon bulletproof vests. In the latest settlement against two now bankrupt Point Blank companies, located in Pompano Beach, Florida and Jacksboro, Tennessee, the government agreed to accept $1 million to resolve claims that the companies made defective vests with knowledge that the Zylon degraded rapidly over time and therefore was not suitable for ballistic use. Point Blank vests were purchased by the U.S. government, as well as by state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies. Many purchases by state, local, and tribal agencies were partially funded by the U.S. Department of Justice's Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program. At least four other lawsuits are currently pending against other manufacturers of allegedly defective bulletproof vests. Justice Department press release (November 7, 2011).
     Canadian firm and its U.S. subsidiary agree to a $4 million settlement in an action alleging defective Zylon ballistics vests. U. S. v. Lincoln Fabrics.
     Canadian firm pays more than $1 million to end Justice Dept. claims that its ballistic vests were defective. The vests were manufactured with Toyobo Zylon®, a thermoset polyurethane synthetic polymer. U.S. v. Barrday Corp.; DoJ Press Doc. #09-062 (2009). Editor's note: Under a 2005 settlement, Toyobo Corp. created a $29 million settlement fund to defray the cost of replacement vests.
     Ballistic vest manufacturer agrees to pay the U.S. Government $960,000 to settle a suit charging that the firm violated the False Claims Act by supplying defective Zylon® bulletproof vests. In 2005 the DoJ intervened in a civil action against Second Chance Body Armor and Toyobo; Second Chance filed for bankruptcy in 2004. In re Protective Products International Inc., DoJ Press Release 08-288. Also see U.S. v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., #1:04-cv-00280 and U.S. v. Toyobo Co. Ltd., #1:07-cv-01144 (D.D.C.).
     Federal court certifies multi-state body armor litigation as a class action. Southern States Police Benevolent Assn. v. First Choice Armor & Equip., #06-10034, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 18372 (D. Mass.).
     N.Y. Appellate Court rejects a lawsuit against the city because of injuries sustained while wearing rubber boots selected by his superiors. "The function of selecting firefighting equipment is clearly a discretionary governmental function." Amodio v. City of New York, 2006 NY Slip Op 7566, 2006 N.Y. App. Div. Lexis 12545 (A.D. 2006). {N/R}
     Trial court dismisses a suit against an electrical weapon manufacturer alleging wrongful death, emotional distress and product liability. Madrigal v. Taser Intern., #CV 2004-016415, Maricopa Co., Ariz., Super. Ct. (Unpub. 2005). {N/R}
     Illinois town files a federal class action suit claiming that Taser has misrepresented the safety of its pulsed energy weapons. Vil. of Dolton v. Taser Int., #05CV4126 (Compl. filed 7-18-2005) (N.D. Ill. 2005). {N/R}
     Japanese manufacturer of Zylon ballistic vests offers $29 million to settle an Oklahoma class action lawsuit. Justice Dept. and others also have sued the manufacturer and distributor. The settlement satisfies class-action litigation in California, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Oklahoma and West Virginia. Lemmings v. Second Chance, #CJ-2004-62 (Okla. Dist. Ct., Mayes Co., settled 2005); Southern States PBA vs. Armor Holdings, #2004-2942CA (filed 2004, Fla. 4th Cir. Ct.); United States (Movant) in re Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor, #1:04-cv-00280 (filed 2004, D.D.C.), alleging False Claims Act violations (31 U.S. Code §3729). [2005 FP Sep]
     State court jury in Missouri finds that Ford is not liable for the death of a state trooper who suffered fatal burns when his Crown Vic cruiser was struck from behind. Newton v. Ford Motor Co., No. 03CV-215678 (Mo., Jackson Co. Cir. Ct. 2005). {N/R}
     Federal appeals court affirms the dismissal of a suit for wrongful death and injuries brought by the survivors NYC firefighters, claiming that Motorola intentionally sold the FDNY radios that are ineffective in high-rise buildings. Sept. 11th Victim Compensation Fund was the exclusive remedy of all claimants. Virgilio v. City of New York, #04-1942, 407 F.3d 105, 2005 U.S. App. Lexis 7441 (2d Cir. 2005), affirming #03cv10156, 2004 U.S. Dist. Lexis 3636, 2004 WL 433789 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). [2005 FP Jul]
     Various class action suits are pending against the sellers of body armor made with Zylon fiber. Although lighter weight than Kevlar, Zylon vests allegedly have deteriorated prematurely, and were unable to sustain a ballistic impact. Lemmings v. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc., #CJ-2004-62 (Dist. Ct., Mayes Co., Okla.); Police Dept. of the City of Dermott v. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc., # CV 2004-119-1 (Cir. Ct. Chicot Co., Ark.); State of Texas v. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc., (Dist. Ct. Dallas Co., Tex.); Southern States PBA v. Armor Holdings, Inc., #2004-2942CA (4th Cir. Fla. 2004). [2005 FP May]
     Tribal court lacks jurisdiction over a product liability suit against the manufacturer of a Navajo police SUV, arising out of a fatal rollover on the reservation. Ford Motor Co. v. Todecheene, #02-17048, 394 F.3d 1170, 2005 U.S. App. Lexis 398 9th Cir. 2005). {N/R}
     Illinois jury finds for the manufacturer in a class action suit challenging the safety of the Crown Victoria "Police Interceptor" four-door sedan. Similar suits are pending in other states. St. Clair Co. Sheriff's Office v. Ford Motor Co. (Ill. 20th Jud. Cir. Ct. 2004).See also, In re Ford Motor Co. Panther Platform / Fuel Tank Design Products Liability Litigation, formerly known as In Re Ford Motor Co. Crown Victoria Police Interceptor Products Liability Litigation, #1488, 259 F.Supp.2d 1366, 2003 U.S. Dist. Lexis 6138 (MDL 2003) and 229 F.Supp.2d 1377, 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 20250 (MDL 2002).[2005 FP Jan]
     New Jersey court jury awards $1.5 million for past and future earnings losses, and $400,000 for pain and suffering, to the widow of a Paramus police officer that was killed when his Crown Vic spun into a utility pole. The plaintiff claimed the manufacturer knew of a steering defect and had failed to correct it. Brock v. Ford Motor Co., Super.Ct. Bergen Co. N.J. (verdict July 3, 2003). {N/R}
     Jury awards $842,000 to a plaintiff with latex glove allergy. Many other claims in litigation. Falcone v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., Court of Common Pleas for Philadelphia Co., Pa. -- Unpublished jury verdict reported in The Legal Intelligencer (Oct. 2, 2001). [2001 FP 171-2]
     Estate of a Chicago firefighter, who was killed after jumping into an inflatable “Life Cube” during a training exercise, sued the manufacturer and distributor. Those defendants, in turn, could implead the city for unlimited contribution. McNamee v. Fed. Equip. v. Chicago, 677 N.E.2d 8 (Ill.App. 1997). [1998 FP 57]
     Chicago jury rejects claims against ladder truck manufacturers in a damage suit brought by firefighter whose legs were crushed when he was pinned against another truck. Guzick v. Seagrave Fire Apparatus et al, Cook Co. Cir.Ct. #91L-4970, 12/12/1997 Chgo. D. Law Bull. 19. [1998 FP 26]
     Defective design of a water cannon or deck gun, and/or a failure to warn fire depts. about its dangers, can be the predicate of liability if a firefighter is injured. Wright v. Stang Mfg., 63 Cal.Rptr.2d 422 (Cal.App. 1997). {N/R}
     Federal appeals court rejects suit of data processor who sued a keyboard manufacturer for causing her to suffer bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, as a result of using a defective design and a failure to warn users of the hazards. Schneck v. IBM, #96-5427 (3d Cir. 1997). {N/R}
     Firefighters who sued siren manufacturer for their hearing losses are denied class action status. Hanson v. Fed. Signal Corp., 679 A.2d 785 (Pa.Super. 1996). {N/R}
     Appellate panel exonerates ballistic vest manufacturer. No duty to warn users of limited protection in areas where panels adjoined in an unconcealed manner. Sanders v. Amer. Body Armor & Eqpmt., 652 So.2d 883 (Fla.App. 1995). [1996 FP 25-6]
     Philadelphia firefighters win damage suit against manufacturer of bunker gear for superheated interior moisture. In re Morning Pride Mfg., 141 (50) Chi. D. Law Bull. 1 (E.D.Pa. Verd. 3/8/95). [1995 FP 91-2]
     Superior court dismisses carcinogen suit against police radar manufacturer. Vedborg v. Kustom Signals, Inc. Orange Co. Super. Ct. #68-68-87 (1993). [1994 FP 9]
     Jury finds for radar gun manufacturers in suit by cancer stricken police officer. Bendure v. Kustom Signals Inc., #C-91-1174, 22 OSH Rep. 1554, 61 LW 2499 (N.D.Cal. 1993). [1993 FP 77]
     Connecticut State Police cease use of hand-held radar guns; claims were filed by two Connecticut officers who allege that radar guns are carcinogenic. California suits also filed. Bendure v. Kustom Signals, Inc.; Hutchison v. Kustom Signals, Inc. U.S. Dist. Ct. #C91-1173,-1174 (N.D.Cal. 1991). [1992 FP 43] Note: The Bendure case resulted in a defense verdict; see 61 LW 2499.
     1992 Connecticut law bars hand-held radar guns. 30 G.E.R.R. (BNA) 857. [1992 FP 122]
     Connecticut State Police cease use of hand-held radar guns; claims were filed by two Connecticut officers who allege that radar guns are carcinogenic. California suits also pending. Bendure v. Kustom Signals, Inc.; Hutchison v. Kustom Signals, Inc. U.S. Dist. Ct. #C91- 1173,-1174 (N.D.Cal. 1991). [1992 FP 43]
     Police officer recovers $50,000 against manufacturer of defective tire, which failed during a high speed chase. Doe v. Roe, U.S. Dist. Ct. #83-1288-REK (D. Mass. 1987).
     Estate of deceased FBI agent settles claim against airplane manufacturer, others, for $1.2 million. Estate of Michael Lynch v. Cessna Aircraft Co., U.S. Dist. Ct. (S.D. Ohio 3/10/87); 133 (49) Chgo. D. Law. Bull. 1.
     Manufacturer can be liable for furnishing inadequate equipment; neither "firemen's rule" or "government specifications" test applicable. Price v. Tempo and ALB v. Goodall Rubber Co., 603 F.Supp. 1359 (E.D. Pa. 1985).
     Federal appeals court affirms $789,650 product liability judgment against the manufacturer of an aerosol chemical irritant system. Canister dislodged from the holster, discharging the contents. The plaintiff suffered severe dermatitis (itching, open sores, infection, inflammation and blistering) and was unable to continue work as a police officer due to "exposure to substances to which he had become sensitized." McDonald v. Federal Laboratories, 724 F.2d 243, 1984 U.S. App. Lexis 26731 (1st Cir.). {N/R}
     Next of kin of deceased deputy could bring suit for death allegedly caused by toxic fumes from tear gas canister. Nicholas v. City of Alton, 437 N.E.2d 757 (Ill.App. 1982).
     Divided Colorado Supreme Court rejects the product liability claim of an off-duty officer who was injured when a safety helmet came off while riding a motorcycle. It was a "general" duty helmet, and not the model designed for motorcycle use. Amer. Sfty. Equip. Corp. v. Winkler, #79SC352, 640 P.2d 216, 1982 Colo. Lexis 523. {N/R}
     Air pak manufacturer settles Lubbock death suits for over four million dollars. Haggard v. Scott Aviation Division of A-T-O, Inc., U.S. Dist. Ct. (N.D. Tex. 1980).
     $400,000 settlement in defective safety shooting. Sacramento Co. Sup'r Ct. #272845, Calif. (1979).
     Another settlement for defective .357 magnum; $585,000 given secretary. Foster v. Sturm, Ruger & Co., Pima Co. Ariz. Sup'r Ct. #170208 (1979).
     Philadelphia sues fire truck manufacturer; defective pumpers alleged. City of Philadelphia v. Ward La France, U.S. Dist. Ct. (E.D. Pa. 7/31/78).