Personal Injury Law Journal

Under New Jersey law, ordinarily you are not responsible for injuries caused by someone else driving your car. However, there are certain circumstances in which you may be responsible. A motor vehicle, after all, can be a deadly weapon and therefore you have an obligation to act responsibly when loaning it.

Before turning your keys over to someone else, if you ask questions and place limitations on the driver you are essentially limiting your liability. For example, make sure he or she has a license to operate a vehicle, ask about his or her driving history, make sure he or she is not under the influence of drugs, alcohol or medication. Also, let the driver know that he or she is not permitted to operate your vehicle under the influence of any substance that could impair his or her ability to drive and that he or she should not turn your vehicle over to anyone else.

Although these things may seem logical, if you are proactive and do not assume the answers you are limiting your potential liability. Responsibility for someone else’s negligence may pass to you if you allow a person to operate your vehicle that you knew or should have known would pose a danger to others on the roadway.

Deborah Dunn is an Associate in Stark & Stark’s Marlton, New Jersey office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Ms. Dunn.

On August 2, 2012, The US Consumer Product Safety Commission announced a recall of certain patio bistro sets sold by LOWE’S between August, 2011 and February, 2012.  The set in question was manufactured in China by Midas Lin Co., Ltd.  Each set consisted of two chairs and a small table, and was made of black metal with stained wood back and seats.  The set has reportedly failed causing various injuries, including back injuries, to at least 13 persons.  

More information on the recall and the product can be found at the US Consumer Product Safety Commission’s website.  

Mark Davis is a Shareholder in Stark & Stark’s Lawrenceville, New Jersey office, specializing in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Davis.

Tire failures can result in catastrophic consequences. Most accidents can be avoided by following the tire manufacturer’s instructions and performing proper maintenance. Unfortunately, defects, both manufacturing and design, are causes of a number of failures. If a defect in the tire caused the failure, the tire manufacturer may be responsible for the harm that is caused

Failures can occur during both operation of the vehicle as well as maintenance of the tire. When a tire fails during operation, the operator can experience a sudden loss of control resulting in vehicle rollover or crash. They also fail during mounting and other maintenance resulting in explosive separation of the tire and the rim. The failed tire/wheel assembly becomes a projectile often seriously injuring or killing the tire mechanic or bystanders.

One type of tire failure is known as tread-belt separation. Tires can catastrophically fail in service when the tire tread and belts detach from the carcass or remaining belts of the tire.  Tread belt separation occurs when there is a break down in the adhesion between the steel belts and rubber tread. A number of factors can cause the adhesion between the belt and rubber to fail. Weak or improper compounds, contamination during manufacturing, and other problems can cause the initiation of cracks between the belts and treads. These cracks can continue to develop during the use of the tire. Heat or friction within the tire can speed up this process. Ultimately, this can result in separation and the potential for catastrophic failure of the tire. Under these circumstances, the vehicle can become unstable and difficult to control resulting in vehicle rollover or other terrible consequences.  

Public awareness of these accidents has increased as a result of the rise in the number of crashes involving Firestone tires which were equipped on Ford Explorers during the late 1990s. Strong safety concerns surfaced after a number of tread separations allegedly resulted in vehicle rollovers. This prompted a recall of certain Firestone tires.

If you, your family, or your friends are injured as a result of a tire failure, it is important to call an attorney experienced in investigating tire failure. These cases can be complex and expensive and should be handled by an attorney who has experience in this specialty.

The following is the second part of a two-part series, which will focus on the development and use of the nail gun in the residential construction industry.  The first part can be viewed here.

As the use of nail guns became more popular with residential home builders, in the 60's and 70's, in addition to framing, the gun was used to perform a task called “bump nailing.”  Because it was so powerful, the nail gun was never intended to drive nails into sheet rock or plywood.  However, soon workers discovered by “bumping”  the nail gun across  a piece of plywood, or sheet rock if the contact trip continuously depressed against sheet rock, nailing could be completed in a fraction of the time it took utilizing a framing hammer.

However, bump nailing is extremely dangerous, because if the operator missed the stud, the three inch nail would be driven completely through the 3/8 inch material striking a person working on the other side of the wall.

Numerous, incidents were reported where workers in a different room, were being struck with nails 20 to 30 feet away, completely unaware of the danger to which they were exposed.

In 1989, the Stanley Works purchased Bostitch from Textron Corporation.  Stanley still sold the N16 nailer, with the contact rip, but they renamed it,  model N80-S.

To avoid Product Liability litigation involving the N16, Stanley destroyed  lawsuit records involving the N16.  Meaning if someone was injured using the N80-S and sued, Stanley Bostitch could legally say they had no records of any prior accidents or injuries involving their product.

The risk of injury the nailer poses is not confined to the workplace, because Stanley deals with stores, like Home Depot, and Lowes, enabling a “do-it-yourselfer” to rent a nail gun who have no experience, with the nail gun.  Moreover, as there are no warnings on the nailer, a user will probably not know the nail gun is not safe when working with plywood or sheet rock.  

I have had two cases involving eye injuries with the Stanley Bostitch N80-S nail gun. One involved an inadvertent actuation of the contact trip, by a seasonal laborer causing a ricochet.

The following is the first of a two-part series, which will focus on the development and use of the nail gun in the residential construction industry.  The second part will focus on litigation against nail gun manufacturers, for the serious injuries and deaths it has caused over the last 30 years.

On a present day construction site, the use of power hand tools have enabled workers to greatly increase productivity by  reducing physical stress on muscles and joints caused by repetitive hammering and sawing. In the home building business, the “nail gun,” has largely replaced the handheld hammer, in stud work, roofing and decking.  Starting in the 1950's, the Bostitch Company (then a division of Textron Industrial) took a small German made, handheld, pneumatic stapler used by furniture manufacturers to fasten small brass buttons decorations on sofas and chairs, and redesigned it to shoot nails into studs in framing work.

A nail gun, using 100 psi of compressed air, can drive a three inch long nail through two 2x4s in a fraction of a second. Bostitch, intentionally designed its pneumatic nailer to look like and work like a machine gun by adding a device called a “contact trip” at the end of the barrel.

In the 60's, Bostitch introduced its most powerful model nailer, the N16. Its intent was to associate the N16 nailer with the M16 semi-automatic rifle used in the military. The N16 nailer, as designed was intended to shoot one, three inch nail into a stud when framing. However, the addition of the contact trip allowed multiple nails to be continuously fired when the trip mechanism remained in contact with the wood.

Not only is shooting multiple three inch long nails unnecessary when framing out studs, it is also extremely dangerous.  Most carpenters think it’s necessary to pull the trigger to discharge another nail, but the contact trip allows continuous firing. Unintended actuation of the contact trip creates a cluster of nails, until a nail ricochets back toward the operator, striking him or a co-worker.

In 1973, in an attempt to eliminate this hazard, a Bostitch design engineer designed and patented the “sequential trip” work actuating mechanism.  The sequential trip was designed specifically to replace the contact trip, and eliminate, completely, the discharge of multiple unexpected nails. The addition of the sequential trip caused Bostitch to lose its entire market share of the sale of Bostitch nails.  As a result, their sales director banned the use of the sequential trip within six months, and its sale of nails greatly increased.

The real reason, nail gun manufacturers use the contact trip is because they  make their real money selling nails.  Nail guns, like handheld hammers, never wear out. Guns can last 20 years.

It is a little known fact that, all nail gun manufacturers in the United States belong to a trade organization named “ISANTA,” the International Staple and Nail Trade Association.  The nail gun is the vehicle through which profits are generated.