Product Liability and Defective Products Lawyers in Colorado

Daily reports of dangerous products available to American consumers are becoming commonplace, but when a severe injury results because of a defective product, nothing is the same. A defective product may be one you purchased for your personal use, one that was supplied to you by someone else or one that you use at work. Although there is no duty upon the manufacturer to produce a product that is 'accident-proof,' the manufacturer is required to make a product that is free from defective and unreasonably dangerous conditions. Contact an attorney at Chalat Hatten & Koupal PC today to learn more about the personal injury services we offer.

If you have been injured by a dangerous or defective product, you might be able to bring a products liability case against a variety of parties involved in the manufacturing of the product. Defendants in the case may include a manufacturer of component parts and an assembling manufacturer.

To pursue a product liability claim, the defective condition must have caused your injury; in other words, if the defective condition did not exist, the injury would not have occurred. A defective condition may be a legal cause of the injury even though the outcome involved the act of another, some natural cause or some other cause if the defective condition contributes substantially to producing the injury. A product is defective, or unreasonably dangerous to the user, when it poses a danger for causing physical harm in excess of what would be expected by the ordinary user.

If you are injured by a consumer product, it is important that the product be preserved and not altered in any way. It is also important to preserve any proof of purchase and the documents which accompanied the product, particularly the instruction booklets or warranties. If there were any witnesses to the accident involving the defective product, their contact information should be saved. It is also important to note from whom and where the product was purchased.

If you believe that your injury resulted from a defective product and you wish to discuss your matter with an experienced attorney, please contact or call us at 1.866.701.7292.

Defective Design Results in Traumatic Amputation of Arm

J.R., a 27-year-old lift mechanic at a Colorado ski resort, suffered the traumatic amputation of his right arm while working. The basis of the claim was strict liability for manufacturing defect and design defects in the conveyor-type ski lift manufactured by the defendant Magic Carpet Ski Lifts, Inc. The precise nature of the manufacturing defect was an in-running nip point created by the improper rotation of a brush under the conveyor, into which J.R.'s right arm was drawn while working on the lift.

On the day of the accident, Copper was getting one of its best snowfalls of the year. The area was busy. A class of beginners was anxiously awaiting the opening of the Easy Rider, after lunch. J.R. had been assigned the Easy Rider, and was cleaning snow off the lift and out from under it. As was the practice with other mechanics, the lift was run to mechanically sweep snow off the belt. As the snow accumulated in the headset, J.R. would shovel it out. He then went to adjust the position of the heater with the lift running, reaching in to position it under the snow deposit. His arm was then drawn into the in-running nip point formed by the brush and the belt. He was trapped, he was alone, he was being murdered by the machine. He was able to reach his radio and attract help; other mechanics responded and turned off the machine. His right arm was degloved and later amputated just below the elbow.

The lift was constructed so as to allow the snowbrush to rotate either opposite to the conveyor belt, or in the same direction as the travel of the belt. The wiring of the conveyor motor determined the direction of rotation, and this design created a unique manufacturing defect in the Easy Rider. If the design had required that the brush be wired to rotate in the opposite direction, throwing snow uphill, J.R. simply would not have had his arm drawn in between the belt and brush.

At the time of trial, J.R. had incurred $189,201.90 in past medical bills. His income losses and future medical losses totaled an additional $778,200.00. During the trial, the parties reached a confidential settlement.

Near-Amputation of Hand by Faulty Lab Equipment

This case involved a settlement for a 32-year-old lab technician who suffered a fractured wrist and severed tendon when an animal cage cleaner lift fell on her dominant hand, requiring surgery and resulting in a 9% whole body impairment rating.

The suit against the machine manufacturer alleged that the washer was defective because (1) an unguarded pinch point existed between the lift and the front of the machine, (2) the lift could drop uncontrollably under certain conditions and (3) no interlocking mechanism was installed on the door to prevent users from opening it when the lift was not in a secure position.

The plaintiff's employer, the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, joined the suit to recover for medical benefits and worker's compensation benefits paid to the plaintiff. and for the cost of the cage washer, claiming that the unit was so unsafe as to be unusable.

MTP Custom Machines, a New York manufacturer of industrial and laboratory wash equipment, settled with all parties for $325,000.00.