Nair Law LLC
  • Home
  • Biography
    • Rishi Nair >
      • Representative Experience
      • Publications & Awards
      • Professional & Civic Activities
      • Additional Background
  • Nair Law LLC Blog
  • Press Coverage
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer

POPCORN LUNG PLAINTIFF WINS $7.2M JUDGMENT IN PRODUCT LIABILITY SUIT

9/27/2012

0 Comments

 
The Chicago Tribune reports that a Colorado resident has won a $7.2 million judgment against a Central Illinois microwavable popcorn manufacturer and distributors of the product.  This product liability action resembles the litigation over mesothelioma due to asbestos from the 1960s and on.  In this case, the chemical in the fake butter in microwavable popcorn has led to a serious lung issue in one user who consumed massive quantities of the product.
The issue revolves around whether Kroger Co., through its subsidiary Scoopers supermarket, and Gilster-Mary Lee Corp., the Chester, Ill., private-labeling manufacturer of the popcorn, are liable for negligence for failing to warn consumers about the danger of diacetyl, the butter flavoring used in their microwavable popcorn.

Apparently, the prior victims of this chemical, like asbestos, were employees of manufacturers of chemical because they were exposed to large quantities on their jobs.  However, also like asbestos, the issues were not confined to the employees but also some consumers downwind.

The plaintiff in this case, a resident of Colorado, was diagnosed with lung issues, according to his expert, came from diacetyl exposure preivously only associated with its manufacture.  Since the Plaintiff consumed, by his own admission, daily and in large quantities, the expert witness saw a correlation.  The jury agreed and awarded him over $7 million in damages.  It assigned, through comparative negligence, 80% of the damages to the IL manufacturer and 20% to the retailer, Kroger Co.

Product liability cases often hinge on proving that the manufacturer or seller had a duty to warn about a known or foreseeable risk.  The warning must be conspicuous and adequately warn users of the category and type of harm.  Manufacturers and retailers can innoculate themselves against this risk by satisfying their duty through written, pictorial, or other means that satisfy the rest that prominent, clear warnings.

Design defects, manufacturing defects, and other product liability actions have different elements and standards.  This failure to warn case revolved primarily around whether the risk existed and whether there was causation between the plaintiff's lung condition and the chemical present in the butter flavoring.  For more information about product liability actions, please contact an attorney.  This case should stand as a testament to everyone that product liability actions can result from even the most common of household items.
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Author

    Rishi Nair owns Nair Law LLC and practices as Of Counsel at Keener and Associates, P.C.

    Archives

    October 2013
    September 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012

    Categories

    All
    Accident
    ADA
    Affirmative Defense
    Alienation Of Affection
    Appeal
    Association
    Award
    Bankruptcy
    Breach Of Contract
    Breach Of Warranty
    Cancellation
    Cease And Desist
    Certify
    Choice Of Forum
    Choice Of Law
    Civil Rights
    Civil Rights Act Of 1964
    Class
    Class Action
    Commerce Clause
    Common Carrier
    Common Elements
    Compliance
    Condo
    Condominium
    Constitution
    Constitutional Rights
    Contracts
    Conversion
    Countersue
    Criminal Defense
    Debt
    Debt Collector
    Deep Dish Pizza
    Defamation
    Defense
    Dilution
    Disability
    Discrimination
    Dog Bite
    Driver
    Duty Of Care
    Elements
    Employment
    Employment Litigation
    Expert
    Express Warranty
    Failure To Maintain
    Fall Protection
    FDCPA
    Federal
    Federal Law
    First Amendment
    FOIA
    Forcible Entry And Detainer Act
    Forum Non Conveniens
    Fourteenth Amendment
    Hotel
    Illinois
    Illinois Law
    Implied Warranty
    Infringement
    Injunction
    Insurance
    Intellectual Property
    Intentional Tort
    IP Litigation
    IP Litigation
    Jury
    Jury Verdict
    Lawsuit
    Litigation
    Medical Malpractice
    Negligence
    Negotiate
    Osha
    Personal Injury
    Product Liability
    Property
    Protected Conduct
    Real Estate Landlord Tenant Ordinance
    Real Property
    Reckless
    Retaliation
    RLTO
    Safety
    Second Appellate District
    Section 1983
    Seniority
    Settlement
    Seventh Circuit
    Special
    Speeding
    Sports
    Subrogation
    Tax
    Taxation
    Ticket
    Title VII
    Tort
    Tortious Interference
    Trademark
    Trademark Enforcement
    Trademark Litigation
    Trespass
    Trespass To Chattels
    TTAB
    Uniform Commercial Code
    Unpaid
    Vehicle
    Workplace Accident

    RSS Feed

    Privacy Policy
    Terms of Use
    Disclaimer


Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
Photo used under Creative Commons from Phil Roeder