Illinois Injury Lawyer Blog

Our Chicago personal injury lawyers were pleased to read that justice was attained on behalf of a man who was rendered tetraplegic – with no use of his lower extremities and partial use of his upper extremities – following a tragic accident on a Chicago expressway.

Every time a driver gets behind the wheel of a car, he or she is accepting responsibility for the safety of everyone else on the road. Although accidents can and do happen, when a driver's negligent behaviors or careless actions lead to the injury or death of another person, the negligent driver must be held accountable.

In this particular case, the defendants admitted liability for the crash ton the Eden’s Expressway, so the Cook County jury was left only to determine damages. In Chicago personal injury cases, when defendants are found to be liable for the harm caused, they may be made to pay compensatory damages to put the victim back in the position he or she was in before the injury occurred. This includes covering medical and hospital expenses, and in more serious cases, compensating the victim for a loss of normal life or lost wages. In some cases when the driver’s errors are egregious, he or she may also be made to pay punitive damages, which serve to punish him or her and to send a message to other drivers in the same position to be more careful in the future.

Prior to the jury verdict being returned, attorneys from either side reached a high-low agreement of $25 million to $50 million. A high-low agreement is a contract between parties in a personal injury case, which ensures that, no matter what the amount of damages the jury returns, the lowest amount that can be received by the victim, and the highest amount the defendant may be made to be paid are predetermined. As a result, when the Cook County jury awarded $23 million in damages, the final award was $25 million.

Injuries suffered as a result of these types of accidents can be severe and life altering. Our Chicago personal injury lawyers have successfully handled nearly every type of motor vehicle negligence case and recovered millions of dollars in accident lawsuit verdicts and settlements for victims and their families. Our attorneys have both the experience and knowledge to handle even the most complex car accident lawsuits.

In fact, our attorneys obtained $6.5 million settlement in a trucking accident case for the family of a 32-year-old woman who was killed when their pick-up truck was rear-ended by a semi-truck. Our client and his son both suffered significant personal injuries in the collision. The defendant truck driver was found to be under the influence of marijuana and operating an over-loaded, unsafe truck. In violation of federal regulations, the defendant truck owners failed to drug-screen or perform background checks on their drivers.

If you or a loved one have been injured in a motor vehicle accident that is the result of another driver’s negligent behavior, contact an attorney to better understand your rights under the law.

Camping is a popular leisure activity for many Illinoisans; but when campgrounds are not well-maintained, things can get dangerous. Tragically, that’s exactly what happened to a family whose two youngest children were killed when a tree fell on their tent while camping at an Illinois campground.

The family was camping out at a popular resort campground; when they became aware of an impending thunderstorm, the father asked the property managers whether the family would be able to stay overnight in one of the log cabins on the property. Nevertheless, the owners of the campground refused, saying the cabin needed cleaning. As the storm worsened, the National Weather Service issued a severe thunderstorm warning and alerted people to potentially destructive winds. Still the family was not permitted to use the log cabin for shelter.

At some point during the overnight hours, a tree that was suffering from trunk rot was knocked down by the storm. Trunk rot is a fungal disease that causes wood at the center of trees to decay, causing the wood to soften and become structurally weaker. As a result, the tree was too feeble to withstand the storm, and fell on the family’s tent; the two youngest children were killed by the impact.

Illinois premises liability law is a significant branch of Illinois personal injury law that allows victims to recover after they have been injured on another person’s property, and the negligence of the property owner was the cause of that harm. In order to apply to a set of circumstances, Illinois premises liability law requires a number of factors to be satisfied: the defendant must be the owner or possessor of the land, or “premises” – in this case, the defendants were the campground owners. Additionally, the person or persons on the land of another must be injured by negligence or a different wrongful act; in this particular situation, the campground owners had a duty to maintain the grounds and ensure that they were safe for campers.

In cases such as this, Illinois premises liability law may be triggered if it can be shown that the property owners or managers either failed to maintain the property, created unsafe conditions that caused the injury, or knew about the unsafe hazard but didn't alert visitors or tenants to this fact.

Following the tragic series of events, the family filed suit against the owners of the recreational campground: The lawsuit accused the campground of being negligent in two ways: not removing the tree suffering from trunk rot and not evacuating campers.

Just this week, a settlement was reached in the case. The owners of the premises were made to pay the family $1.25 million dollars for the wrongful deaths of the two children.

In Illinois wrongful death cases, relatives and loved ones may be able to receive compensation for their loss; this often comes in the form of damages for loss of companionship, or damages for lost wages that the individual would have otherwise contributed to supporting his or her family. In this case, the parents would have recovered for the loss of the companionship and love from their two children.

Though a lawsuit can never bring a loved one back to life, it is a step in the right direction, both for achieving justice, and making those at fault pay for their careless actions. If you or a loved one have been injured on the premises of another, contact an attorney to better understand your rights under the law.

If we’re not told the source of contamination, how are we supposed to avoid becoming infected?

That’s exactly what our Chicago personal injury lawyers are wondering, having read a recent report by MSNBC that stated that, whenever possible, government officials use tactics to keep the public in the dark about which food producers and restaurants have been linked to illnesses.

This report came on the heels of a three-month investigation into a salmonella outbreak that sickened 68 people in 10 states. Instead of warning consumers when they knew the source of the infection, officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention refused to identify the manufacturer of the tainted food, instead calling it “Restaurant Chain A.”

In fact, reported MSNBC, that’s the second time in a little over a year that the government agency has masked the source of a foodborne illness; in the fall of 2010, a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated that 155 people in 21 states were sickened by two rare strains of salmonella traced to an anonymous Mexican-style fast-food chain eventually identified as Taco Bell.

Under Illinois law, companies that manufacture and market food have a responsibility to ensure that foods they produce are safe for human consumption. When a food manufacturer, distributer, or restaurant disseminates an infected food product to the public and a consumer is sickened or injured as a result, that company may be held legally responsible and may be made to pay for damages that result from the injury.

According to 2010 estimates by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, approximately 48 million people are sickened each year by a foodborne illness; of those, more than 125,000 people require hospitalization and 3,000 die after consuming contaminated fruits, vegetables, meats, nuts and processed foods in their homes or in restaurants. Nevertheless, these are the same government officials keeping secret the names of the responsible companies, which prevent consumers from being able to make choices to protect themselves.

Reported MSNBC, Dr. Robert Tauxe, a top CDC official, defended the agency’s practice of withholding company identities, which he said aims to protect not only public health, but also the bottom line of businesses that could be hurt by bad publicity. Still, our Chicago personal injury lawyers know that preventing illness before it has a chance to harm consumers is the best possible solution.

People who suffer serious personal injury, hospitalization, or death due to illness from contaminated foods may be able to seek compensation for economic and non-economic damages from those responsible for providing or distributing the food. Damages include such things as lost wages, compensation for pain and suffering, and loss of the companionship of a loved one who has died from the illness. Our Illinois food poisoning attorneys have extensive experience handling these types of cases, and understand what it takes to be successful in even the most complicated Illinois food poisoning cases. In fact, our attorneys obtained a $4 million settlement against a hotel chain, on behalf of three convention attendees who contracted salmonella poisoning that caused them to suffer crippling arthritic injuries.

If you or a loved one has suffered illness due to a foodborne illness – either from a restaurant or purchased from a grocery store – contact an attorney to better understand your rights under the law.

Just this week, a jury awarded a $170 million judgment against an HCA-Healthcare-owned hospital and a doctor accused of medical negligence in a case involving botched weight-loss surgery.

The Hospital Corporation of America, or HCA is the largest private operator of health care facilities in the world. HCA boasts 273 facility locations across the United States, and, in 2010, reported revenue of just over $33 billion.

According to The Tennesseean, the victim, a former sheriff’s deputy, sued the doctor and hospital more than two years ago after complications from weight-loss surgery that weren’t diagnosed or treated in a timely manner left the man wheelchair-bound, nearly blind, and unable to speak.

The man had allegedly gone into the hospital for gastric bypass surgery – a surgical procedure that divides the stomach into two smaller sections as a treatment for obesity. Nevertheless, though a group of surgeons at the hospital, including the defendant in this case, marketed themselves as a team that performed gastric bypass surgeries, as it turned out, “the doctor in this case shouldn’t have been doing the surgery and should not have been managing this patient because he did not have proper credentials to do this surgery,” reported The Tennesseean.

Illinois medical malpractice lawsuits arise when people are injured by careless or intentional acts on the part of a doctor, nurse, hospital, or other healthcare provider. Healthcare professionals owe a duty of care to their patients, and when that duty is breached – such as in situations where the provider fails to diagnose an illness – the failure is said to be a "tort," or civil wrong, which can provide the basis for a lawsuit. As a result, the healthcare professional or institution may be made to pay damages to put the injured person back in the position he or she was in prior to being injured.

As a facility that holds itself out to be a provider of professional health care services, HCA is also legally responsible for the actions of their doctors, nurses, and other health care professionals. When these employees are negligent the company may be liable for either failing to properly train their staff, or failing to ensure that properly trained staff were hired to fill the positions.

In the end, the jury found that the HCA-run hospital and the doctor were medically negligent, and found that the hospital had committed fraud and made misrepresentations about the doctor’s surgical qualifications. As a result, the jury found the defendants liable for compensatory damages of $168, and awarded an additional $10 million in punitive damages in the case.

When healthcare providers are held legally responsible for harm caused to their patients in Illinois medical malpractice cases, they may be made to pay compensatory damages, which attempt to put an injured person back in the position he or she was in before being injured, such as compensation for medical and hospital expenses, and the loss of a normal life following the injury. Additionally, in some cases, punitive damages may also be awarded; punitive damages are intended to punish wrongdoers and send a message to the responsible healthcare professional and other providers to be more careful in the future.

Though Illinois medical malpractice lawsuits can’t always undo the harm done, they are an enormous step toward helping victims achieve justice, and preventing future medical negligence.

Not long ago, our Chicago personal injury attorneys reflected on the potential hazard posed by a food recall of Kraft’s microwavable Velveeta Shells & Cheese. It seems now that our fears have come to light, after it was recently reported that a couple has filed a personal injury lawsuit against Kraft Foods, alleging the husband sustained a perforated bowel and peritonitis from a piece of metal he ingested when he ate the microwaveable meal.

According to the Kentucky Herald-Leader, the victim underwent surgery for the injuries caused by the metal inclusions one day before Kraft Foods Global recalled the microwavable dish.

Three varieties of Kraft Velveeta Shells & Cheese Microwaveable cups were voluntarily recalled from the market after it was discovered that approximately 137,000 cases of products that contained wire bristles were distributed to retail stores across the United States. The lawsuit alleges the shells and cheese "contained pieces of metal which caused the product to be hazardous and dangerous if ingested."

Kraft Foods, Inc. is an American food and beverage conglomerate, headquartered in the Chicago suburb of Northfield, Illinois. Kraft Foods is the third largest food and beverage manufacturer in the world, and markets its products in more than 170 countries. Nevertheless, Illinoisans are at perhaps the greatest risk for harm: the recalled products were manufactured in Champaign, Illinois, and distributed to retail stores across Illinois.

The personal injury lawsuit in this case asserts that the man bought the product from a local Sam’s Club and ate it on September 21, 2011. He was admitted to the hospital 8 days later, and, according to the Kentucky Herald-Leader "a CT scan was performed which revealed 'a linear metallic foreign body within the small bowel in the mid abdomen.' Further, the injury caused peritonitis, which can be a life-threatening inflammation.

Ultimately the man had to have a significant portion of his small bowel resectioned to remove both "the metallic body" and the portion of the bowel that had been damaged by the ingested metal, said the Kentucky Herald-Leader.

Products liability is an area of Illinois personal injury law that focuses on dangerous and defective products. "Products," in this instance covers a wide range of categories, including foods merchandised to the public. As a general rule, corporations are responsible for ensuring that the products they manufacture and sell are safe for human use and consumption. When the merchandise is unsafe and causes harm to customers, the company may be held liable for damages caused by the injuries from the dangerous or defective products.

Food manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers. When foreign objects or contagions make their way into foods that are distributed to the public, and consumers are injured because of the dangerous products, the situation may give rise to an Illinois products liability lawsuit such as the one in this case.

If you purchased any of the affected batches of Kraft’s microwavable Velveeta Shells & Cheese, do not eat them. Either throw them away or return them to your local retail store for a full refund. Additionally, if you or a loved one have been injured by a food product, seek medical attention immediately. You may also be entitled to compensation for your injury and an attorney may be able to apprise you of your rights under the law

In the words of Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas L. Kilbride, "this is another step to bring more transparency and more accountability to the Illinois court system."

Our Chicago personal injury attorneys were interested to hear that, starting this year, video cameras will be used to record proceedings in select civil trial courts across Illinois. The new policy, implemented this month, allows cameras in Illinois trial courts on an experimental basis; according to NBC Chicago, the pilot project authorizes coverage in circuit courts that have applied for approval from the Illinois Supreme Court.

Prior to this month, Illinois was one of only 14 states that either didn't allow cameras in trial courts or allowed them on a very restrictive basis, said NBC Chicago. Now, the pilot project, effective immediately, permits cameras in all courtrooms with some exceptions specifically listed in the order: videotaping will not be allowed for jury selection or of jurors at all, to ensure that the jury cannot be unduly influenced. The presiding judge can also choose not to have his or her face shown on camera, and videotaping will not be permitted in cases involving juveniles, adoption, child custody, evidence suppression or trade secret cases. Additionally, there will be no videotaping of testimony by a sexual assault victim unless the testifying victim consents.
Said, Killbride, "the provisions of this new policy keep discretion in the chief circuit judge and the trial judge to assure that a fair and impartial trial is not compromised, yet affords a closer look at the workings of our court system to the public through the eyes of the electronic news media and news photographers."

Once the trial has been recorded, the videotapes will be saved and uploaded to a local server, where they will later be uploaded to the Northern District’s website for public viewing. However, before being made available to the public, the judge may order the tape to be edited to remove parts inappropriate for public viewing.

At this point of the policy’s implementation, the cameras are only being employed to record civil cases. Our Chicago personal injury attorneys are encouraged by the fact that the public will be afforded access to the inner workings of a courtroom. Unfortunately when most laypersons hear about Illinois personal injury lawsuits, they only catch distorted headlines that portray victims as people trying to make a quick buck.

Nevertheless, that isn’t the truth. Illinois personal injury claims arise when people are injured by careless or intentional acts of others, or injured by products that are defective in some way. When someone is determined to be legally responsible for injuring someone else, they are liable for the injury, and may be made to pay the injured person compensatory damages.

When people are legitimately hurt by negligent or intentional acts of others, the law provides a fair forum for those harmed to achieve justice. Hopefully, allowing access inside courtrooms will be a step in the right direction for changing these incorrect beliefs by allowing people to hear the story from start to finish, and allowing the public an unbiased view into the reality of how decisions are reached.

It seems almost too appalling to be true, but a health professional was recently indicted for using office supplies – instead of legitimate sanitary medical devices – to treat patients.

Any Chicago personal injury attorney can attest that Illinois medical malpractice lawsuits arise all too often when practitioners’ intentionally harmful acts harm patients. Doctors, dentists, and other healthcare professionals owe a duty of care to their patients. Part of that duty includes providing the best care, and ensuring that their actions don’t unreasonably put their patients at risk.

But that risk is exactly what has happened in a recent case where a former dentist has pleaded guilty to Medicaid fraud after using paper clips instead of stainless steel posts when performing post-buildups following root canal procedures. According to a report published by MSNBC, the reason the dentist had used the paperclips was because they were significantly cheaper than the requisite steel posts. Prosecutors say that the Medicaid fraud totaled $130,000 from the scheme.

Says MSNBC, the 53 year-old dentist used sections of paper clips from his office, instead of the professionally-accepted stainless steel posts.

A “root canal” procedure is the colloquial term for an endodontic dental operation; the inner pulp of an infected tooth is removed, the duct of the tooth is cleaned out and disinfected, and then the space is packed with an inert filling material. If the tooth is weak and cannot sustain pressure on its own, a dentist will perform a post & core build up, removing some of the filling material and implementing a stainless steel post to give the crown (the fabrication that replaces the visible tooth) some stability. When paperclip pieces are used instead of the sterile steel posts, the risks of infection are high.

Illinois medical malpractice lawsuits arise when people are injured by careless or intentional acts on the part of a doctor, nurse, hospital, or other healthcare provider. Healthcare professionals owe a duty of care to their patients, and when that duty is breached – such as in situations where the provider fails to diagnose an illness – the failure is said to be a "tort," or civil wrong, which can provide the basis for a lawsuit. As a result, the healthcare professional or institution may be made to pay damages to put the injured person back in the position he or she was in prior to being injured.

Though at this point the dentist is only facing criminal charges for the alleged malpractice and harm to his patients, victims of his injurious procedure who were harmed by his paper-fastener proclivity may have grounds to file lawsuits against the dentist. The paperclip parts – and the resulting contamination – can cause infection and enormous discomfort; if personal injury lawsuits are indeed brought against the dentist, he could be made to pay his victims monetary damages for pain and suffering, as well as for the necessity of future medical and dental work. Additionally, a court may find that the dentist is liable for punitive damages, which are implemented in Illinois personal injury lawsuits to punish the wrongdoer for his or her egregious bad actions. Punitive damages also serve to send a message to others in similar positions to the defendant party such as other dentists, urging them not to act in the same harmful way.

Special laws are in place to protect patients from negligent or intentionally harmful health care professionals, and an attorney may be able to advise you of your rights under the law.

Our Chicago personal injury attorneys spoke too soon when we postulated last week that it was already a busy time of year for automobile recalls.

Following retractions by both Ford and BMW, Kia Motors is the latest automaker to have products join the list of retracted cars, after it was found that both Kia Optima sedans and Kia Rondo crossover vehicles have potentially faulty driver airbags.

Kia Motors America is the American branch of sales, marketing, and distribution of Kia Motors Corporation, a multinational car-manufacturing conglomerate that reported sales of over 1.4 million vehicles in 2010. Kia Motors America first began producing automobiles in the United States in 2009, and it is this plant at which the Optima sedan and other crossover vehicles are manufactured.

According to a report issued this week by MSNBC, Kia is recalling 145,755 vehicles across the United States because the clock-spring contact assembly for the driver's-side air bag supplemental restraint system may become damaged over time, potentially causing the driver's air bag not to deploy.

In 1984, the United States government amended the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety standard to require that cars produced after 1989 be equipped with either airbags or an automatic seatbelt. In the years since, statistics have shown the enormous benefits of airbags, and federal safety standards have increased to necessitate airbags in all passenger vehicles.

For most recently produced cars, a central Airbag Control Unit (ACS) monitors sensors within the vehicle to determine pressure on the car, impact to the automobile, and/or brake pressure. When the threshold on one of the sensors is reached, the ACS directs the airbag to deploy, which rapidly inflates a nylon fabric bag. The bag is slightly porous, and when the vehicle’s occupant collides with the airbag, it releases the inflating gas through small holes in the bag; in doing so, (and in addition to restraint provided by a seatbelt,) it precludes the passenger from colliding with the much harder inside wall of the automobile, preventing more serious injuries. If an airbag does not deploy as intended, the risks arise of the passenger either colliding with the car itself or with the still-inflating airbag.

Corporations owe a duty of care to consumers. When their products ultimately harm consumers, those companies may be held legally responsible for damages from those injuries. In this case, if a Kia owner’s airbag does not inflate properly upon impact, the driver of the vehicle could suffer more serious injuries than if the airbag had been working properly. Although Kia Motors would not be liable for causing the crash, they could potentially be responsible for causing circumstances that made resulting injuries worse.

Though to date, Kia Motors is not aware of any injuries caused by the faulty airbags, if a car accident occurred and the airbags failed to deploy, Kia could be held legally responsible for the monetary damages required to compensate the consumer if it can be shown that his or her injuries are worse as a result of Kia’s defective product.

When consumers are harmed because products are unsafe, an Illinois personal injury lawsuit may arise, and the corporations responsible for production may be made to pay compensatory damages to put the consumer back in the position they were in before the injury occurred. This includes covering medical and hospital expenses, and in more serious cases, compensating the victim for a loss of normal life or lost wages. In some cases when the companies’ errors are egregious, they may also be made to pay punitive damages which serve to punish the company and to send a message to others in the same position to be more careful in the future.

For this particular recall, the models affected are 9 5,569 2006-2008 Optimas and 50,186 2007-2008 Rondos. Our Chicago personal injury attorneys want consumers to be careful; if you have one of these cars, do not drive it until it has been examined by a licensed Kia dealer.

Illinois premises liability law is a significant branch of Illinois personal injury law that allows victims to recover after they have been injured on another person’s property and the negligence of the property owner was the cause of that harm.

That’s exactly what’s being alleged in a recently filed Chicago wrongful death lawsuit. The mother of a woman who was killed in a fire in high-rise apartment building on Lake Shore Drive earlier this month brought the claim. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, the lawsuit alleges that the companies responsible for managing the building, 3130 N. Lake Shore LLC and Planned Property Management Inc., are legally liable, and that the 32 year-old woman would otherwise be alive, had there been a sprinkler system in place to put out the fire.

Additionally, the claim asserts that that the two management companies failed to warn the woman of the fire in the building, and permitted her to use the elevators when they "should have known if was not safe to do so."

The Chicago Sun-Times reports that the woman died from carbon monoxide intoxication, and inhalation of smoke and soot after she took the elevator to the 12th floor of the building. The tenants of the apartment in which the fire started had left their door open so a pet could escape; nevertheless, the toxic fumes seeped out as well, leading to the woman’s death.

When an accident or injury occurs to a an individual who – at the time of the injury – is on another person's property, the owner or manager of the property may be liable if it can be proved that their negligence led to the injury.

In cases such as this, Illinois premises liability law may be triggered if it can be shown that the property owners or managers either failed to maintain the property, created unsafe conditions that caused the injury, or knew about the unsafe hazard but didn't alert visitors or tenants to this fact.

In this particular situation, legal responsibility could potentially arise from two issues: initially, the fact that the building owners failed to install sufficient sprinklers to extinguish a fire is a prime example of failing to maintain the property, and even created a situation where a potentially dangerous set of circumstances could arise. Moreover, the fact that the woman was allowed to use the elevator and was never warned of the fire in the building is epitomical of failing to alert individuals of dangerous circumstances.

If the property managers are indeed held liable for having been negligent, and it can be shown that their negligence caused or contributed to cause the woman’s death, they may be on the hook for a lot of money.

In Illinois wrongful death cases, relatives and loved ones may be able to receive compensation for their loss; this often comes in the form of damages for loss of companionship, or damages for lost wages that the individual would have otherwise contributed to supporting his or her family. Though a lawsuit can never bring a loved one back to life, it is a step in the right direction, both for achieving justice, and making those at fault pay for their careless actions.

A devastating tragedy reported by the Chicago Tribune has people wondering who’s to blame.

This week, the heartbreaking death of a five year-old child occurred after police in Chicago Heights, Illinois, handed car keys to an intoxicated adult.

According to the Chicago Tribune, after a 23 year-old woman was pulled over and taken into custody for driving with a suspended license, police gave the keys to the 1998 Chevy Cavalier to the woman’s boyfriend; her five year-old son was strapped in a car seat in the back seat.

The woman’s boyfriend spent much of the evening drinking with friends, reported the Chicago Tribune. At some point during the evening, the woman and her son joined him, and, because she wasn’t drinking, she was supposed to drive them back to the man’s house. Instead, she was stopped at 2:35 a.m. by Chicago Heights police for making an improper turn without a signal, reports show. An officer arrested her and handed the vehicle and her son over to her boyfriend.

According to authorities, the boyfriend “didn’t seem drunk.” Nevertheless, less than 40 minutes after the traffic stop, the man veered off the road and the car slammed into a tree. The young boy was killed at the scene, but the driver was unhurt.

Apparently the man’s blood-alcohol level was more than three times the legal limit, and he had marijuana in his system; he has since been charged with felony driving under the influence of alcohol and reckless homicide in the single-car accident, reported the Chicago Tribune. However, the issue remains that the municipal police not only permitted, but also encouraged the man to drive.

Police have a duty of care to the people they protect. Chicago personal injury law principles hold that when people take a particular job in which they undertake to provide services needed for the safety of others, they assume a duty to carry out this promise and are required to use reasonable care in performing their duties.

When the person offering to provide those services fails to use reasonable care in carrying out the job, and his or her negligence causes injury to another person, the negligent person is responsible for the injuries caused, and may be made to answer to an Illinois personal injury lawsuit.

In this particular case, the Chicago Heights police undertook to provide safety to their constituents. They failed to use reasonable care because they didn’t ensure that the man was able to safely operate the car, and this failure ultimately was a cause of the little boy’s death.

Even though the driver has been indicted, the charges understandably provide little consolation to the boy’s family. Illinois personal injury lawsuits attempt to put people back in the position they were in prior to the injury or accident occurring by covering medical expenses, lost wages, or by compensating people for pain and suffering or the loss of a loved one.

Though they cannot bring back lost life, Chicago personal injury lawsuits are vital in the pursuit of justice.

Arguably sponge cake isn’t particularly healthy in any case, but given the FDA’s latest recall, this particular fare could be especially dangerous.

This latest food recall is for Rich Products Corporation’s 1/4 Sheet Artificially-Flavored Vanilla Pre-Soaked Sponge Cake. According to the report issued by the United States Food & Drug Administration, small plastic fragments ranging from 1/4 inch to 3/4 inches, from the pastry’s packaging were found in and on the cakes. As with any foreign object, ingesting these plastic pieces can be potentially dangerous.

Rich Products Corporation is a multinational food-manufacturing corporation headquartered in the United States. The company currently ranks number 161 on Forbes’ list of America’s Largest Private Companies, and sells more than 2,000 different types of products in 73 countries to retailers, in-store bakeries, and other foodservice distributers.

An investigation conducted by Rich Products revealed that the problem was caused by a change in the resin used by the supplier of the plastic packaging. The FDA stated that company is now working with the packaging’s supplier to ensure that defective containers are removed from distribution and that monitoring systems are in place to prevent this problem from happening again in the future.

Although no injuries have yet been reported, the potential for harm is significant enough that the corporation issued a voluntary recall as a precautionary measure. When foreign objects are swallowed, they can cause irritation, inflammation, and scarring to the digestive track. Additionally, they can obstruct passageways either by the size of the object or because of the scarring that is caused from the irritation.

In order to remove a foreign object – such as one of these plastic pieces – after it has been swallowed, a person may need to undergo either surgery or endoscopic foreign body retrieval, which is a collection of techniques in which a gastroscope is used to locate the item and remove it via manipulation.

Illinois product liability law holds that food distributers have a duty to sell reasonably safe food, and are responsible for products they disseminate to the public. When those products cause illness, injury, or death to consumers, the companies are liable for the harm caused. Individuals who suffer due to dangerous food products may be able to seek compensation for economic and non-economic damages.

In this case, if a person swallows one of these plastic pieces and is harmed as a result, Rich Product Corporation could be made to answer to an Illinois product liability lawsuit and be held legally responsible for damages to compensate the victim for medical and hospital expenses, as well as for harm suffered.

Products affected by this retraction include 1/4-sheet cakes sold at in-store bakeries across the country. Customers who have purchased these cakes are urged to destroy or dispose of the affected product.

If you or a loved one have been harmed by this cake – or any other kind of dangerous product – contact an attorney to understand your rights under the law. You may be entitled to compensation for your injuries.

A recent report by the Chicago Tribune reveals a devastating problem: manufacturers of window blinds have ignored demands from federal regulators asking for increased safety standards and to eliminate exposed cords on window blinds and shades that pose a fatal safety risk to young children.

According to U.S. regulators, children can get caught in the cords that hold the blinds together or the cords that are used to pull blinds up and down. In fact, the Federal Safety Agency has said that more than 200 children in the United States have died in the last two decades from being strangled in window cord-related accidents with blinds and shades. Nevertheless, manufacturers, who are responsible for setting their own safety standards, have implemented less-stringent requirements that, according to the Chicago Tribune, advocates say won’t reduce injuries or deaths.

In the summer of 2011, safety regulators from the United States, Canada, and Europe appealed to the window blind industry to raise product safety standards that would reduce the risk of strangulation. However, “the industry is clinging to the status quo and is refusing to address this very dire safety issue,” said Rachel Weintraub, director of product safety with the nonprofit Consumer Federation of America and a member of a task force drafting the new standards.

Safety regulators want the window-covering producers to manufacture blinds without the long cords used to pull blinds up and down; these cords can get wrapped around the necks of children, causing death and serious injuries. In response, manufacturers have said that it’s just not feasible to rid blinds of cords, and that it’s impossible – and unrealistic – to rid the product of all risks.

But that’s not quite right. According to the Chicago Tribune, some companies already make blinds with inaccessible cords. The only issue is that, although that technology exists for some blinds and shades, the cordless technology can add to costs. Asked Bill O’Connor, president of B&W Window Fashions in Waukegan, Illinois, “if it’s a better mousetrap, why isn’t it offered as a standard feature?” His company has developed a Roman shade that doesn’t have accessible cords, and doesn’t cost more to make.

When a company manufactures a product to be marketed to the public, the company is responsible for ensuring the safety of those products. There are three main types of Illinois product liability claims:

1. A manufacturing defect, which generally occurs when an otherwise safe product is assembled carelessly;
2. A design defect, which occurs when, no matter how well the product is put together, its intent or layout is inherently dangerous;
3. A failure to warn, which can occur when a product markets a product that they know to be potentially hazardous, and fails to warn consumers of the latent danger.

In this particular situation, two of these types of liability are incurred. No matter how well the blinds are put together, they pose a risk of strangulation to children. Because these products are inherently dangerous, if a child is harmed or killed by the blinds, the manufacturer could be held legally responsible for the damages caused, and an Illinois wrongful death lawsuit could potentially arise.

Additionally, these dangerous products don’t carry warnings. According to the Chicago Tribune, federal regulators are also proposing that manufacturers require that a warning label on product packaging saying: “for child safety, consider cordless alternatives or products without accessible cords.” Nevertheless, safety advocates say the warning doesn’t explicitly tell parents not to use the products if children are in the home. If parents are unaware of the strangulation hazards posed by the window-coverings and a child is harmed as a result, the parents may be able to bring a Chicago personal injury lawsuit on behalf of the child.

At this point we can hope that regulations passed are stringent enough to protect children, and urge parents to become educated about the safety hazards associated with these products. We are especially proud of our Chicago personal injury attorneys and the changes that their efforts have brought with regard to dangerous products and Illinois product liability law. In many instances, they have not only recovered substantial verdicts and settlements for our clients, but also helped to ensure that the defective product was removed from the market and prevented from causing any further pain, suffering, and damage.