The Ohio public has the right to presume that the substances and items they purchase -- or even are secondarily exposed to -- are safe. Companies are supposed to ensure that the products they manufacture, distribute and sell are free from hazards, or -- in cases involving more dangerous items or materials -- to warn consumers of potential risks and offer instruction in safe handling. When companies fail to do so, they open themselves up to the possibility of product liability lawsuits from parties injured by their products.
Whether in Ohio or any other state, employers are expected – and legally required – to take certain safety precautions when it comes to the well-being of their employees. Unfortunately, sometimes things as simple as laziness, miscommunication or human error mean that these regulations aren't followed, which results in people paying with their health or even their lives. In another state, a recently settled lawsuit appears to have involved a case of this nature, when two employees died from exposure to toxic materials at work.
While it thankfully did not occur in Ohio, a recently filed lawsuit concerns a subject that is the worst nightmare of many parents, no matter where they live. Almost 40 families are suing their school district, their state and Monsanto, alleging exposure to highly toxic materials. Students, teachers and even parents have suffered numerous health problems as a result of the documented, hazardous contaminants present in the facility.
Clothing manufacturers and retailers are expected to follow strict regulations when it comes to flammability. This is to ensure the safety of consumers in Ohio or across the nation who purchase their articles to wear. In another state, a woman has filed a product liability suit alleging that Macy's failed to do so. The lawsuit states that the company's defective manufacturing, negligence and inadequate warnings led to the woman's severe injuries due to burns she suffered while wearing a piece of the company's clothing.
Families in Ohio – and across the country – have every right to expect, even demand, that the items they purchase are free from hazards or obvious health risks. This is especially essential, though, in products designed for young children. A horrific example of this importance was recently illustrated in another state when a small boy was grievously injured, and his parents have filed a product liability lawsuit over the matter.
When Ohio residents get dressed and ready for work every day, the last thing most are thinking about is whether their clothes are poisonous. As preposterous as that notion may sound, though, for thousands of American Airlines employees, the situation is all too real. Workers across the country have gotten sick allegedly due to the toxic materials contained in their work-required uniforms, and the latest incident involving a flight attendant appears to be no exception.
Ohio residents have likely noticed that pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson is in the news a lot lately. From carcinogenic talcum powder to a drug that causes uncontrollable internal bleeding, the product liability lawsuits just seem to keep coming. In another state, the most recent case to make it to court involved, not Xarelto or baby power, but pelvic mesh, and it is expected to be only the first of thousands of claims.
While the use of asbestos has been highly regulated for years now, instances are still coming to light far too frequently in Ohio of workers from railroads and factories who developed illnesses and cancer from this or other hazardous substances. Even worse, many of these diseases prove fatal. Tragically, in another state, a woman has recently filed a lawsuit alleging that years of exposure to toxic materials in his line of work directly led to her husband's death.
Ohio consumers have the right to know of the potential risk they may be facing when using the Nutribullet Pro blender system, an allegedly dangerous household device. According to complaints in a recent product liability lawsuit, a total of 22 customers to date have come forward, claiming to have suffered severe injuries as a result of using the product. Alleged victims of the blender seek to hold legally responsible the device's manufacturer and distributer, Homeland Housewares.
Imagine using a device intended to protect against toxic substances, only to later discover that the product failed in the very purpose for which it was specifically designed. This is precisely what a product liability lawsuit in another state alleges. A worker developed lung cancer because, the complaint claims, the respirator designed to protect him from work-related hazardous materials failed.