That Ryobi saw claim ...

[RogerP]

Remember a few years back the US courts awarding large damages to a chap who cut his fingers off when he'd stripped the saw of most of it's safety features? Well looks like the courts have come to their senses.

About 2 years after a Massachusetts jury awarded Carlos Osorio $1.5 million when he mangled his hand in an accident with a Ryobi tablesaw (a verdict that is still under appeal), an Illinois jury has found in favor of Ryobi and its parent company, One World Technologies, in a similar product-liability lawsuit.

In early May 2007, the suit’s plaintiff, Brandon Stollings, was using a Ryobi model BTS20R-1 table saw to cut a piece of laminate material when the piece “kicked back” at him, causing his left hand to make contact with the saw blade. Two fingers were severed and three were injured. Stollings filed suit, alleging three “design defects:” that the anti-kickback pawls were permanently attached to the blade splitter, so removing the splitter meant removing the pawls; that the blade guard provided with the saw clouds with sawdust, necessitating its removal to see the cut; and the saw lacks flesh-detecting technology that causes the blade to stop and/or drop away when skin touches the moving blade. Stollings admitted at his deposition that he had not read the warnings in the saw’s manual and that he understood the risks of removing the blade guard and cutting freehand.

We’re told the jury announced its verdict on Monday, August 6, but at this time, no case summary is available to give any insight into the jury’s verdict.

 

[houtslager]

common sense taking control here,





nah they don't have that in the States -





bleeding septic tanks !

 

[nev]

"and the saw lacks flesh-detecting technology that causes the blade to stop and/or drop away when skin touches the moving blade" :shock:
may as well go the whole hog and add the following complaint.
"and the saw lacks kineejit-detecting technology that causes the blade to stop and/or drop away when the kineejit gets within 10 ft of the unit."
(homer)

 

[andersonec]

Like the woman who got a very large amount from Macdonalds when she exited a drive through and spilt her coffeee in her lap, said coffee was 'too hot' and burnt her. (USA)

Or the woman who got a large sum when her job caused her to be 'traumatised' she had to read and vet prisoners letters. (UK)

And the chap who sued a council for not giving him the job of answering the phone, he was deaf, his argument was the council could have supplied equipment so that he could operate the telephone. (UK)

No doubt there are loads more.

Andy

 

[cutting42]

Like the woman who got a very large amount from Macdonalds when she exited a drive through and spilt her coffeee in her lap, said coffee was 'too hot' and burnt her. (USA)

Can't speak to the others but the famous Mcdonalds coffee actually was a serious case and the truth suffered due to the case becoming a poster child for "frivolous litigation" arguments.

At the time McDonald's required franchisees to serve coffee at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C). At that temperature, the coffee would cause a third-degree burn in two to seven seconds.

She held the cup between her legs in the passenger seat of her parked grandsons car and tried to open the lid to add milk and sugar when she tipped the whole contends over her lap.

The woman was taken to hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent. She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, she lost 20 pounds (9 kg, nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds (38 kg).[14] Two years of medical treatment followed.