New York has several cases that establish precedent for handling dangerous products for little ones
Dangerous products for kids and babies fall under New York product liability law, but there can be additional standards and regulations for these items.
If you’re the parent or caregiver to a young child, you might feel overwhelmed by the number of recalls on children’s products—sometimes, it seems like there’s something else every day. Babies and children come with a lot of equipment… cribs, car seats, high chairs, play yards, bassinets, bouncers, swings, toys, clothes, etc.
The list goes on.
Product liability is the area of law that handles defective consumer goods. While each state has its own set of regulations and has some nuances to the law, this generally deals with legal standards that ensure consumer product safety.
New York product liability laws encompass various regulations and legal standards to ensure the safety of consumer products, including those intended for children and babies. Here are key aspects of these laws:
New York strict liability law
New York manufacturers, distributors, and retailers can be held strictly liable for injuries caused by defective products. This means that a plaintiff does not need to prove negligence in its design or manufacturing process, only that the product was defective and caused harm.
Example of a strict liability lawsuit for a children’s toy
In this hypothetical scenario, a child was injured by a toy that had easily detachable parts. The small parts presented a choking hazard and the child became injured. The parents filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer, alleging that the toy was defectively designed and inherently unsafe for its intended age group. The plaintiffs pursued the case under the theory of strict liability. They argued that the manufacturer should be held responsible for the injuries caused by the toy, regardless of whether the company was negligent in its design or manufacturing processes.
Key elements of strict liability:
- Defective product: The plaintiffs had to prove the toy was defective when it left the manufacturer’s control. In this case, the small detachable parts constituted a design defect.
- Unreasonably dangerous: The toy was considered unreasonably dangerous for its intended use by young children, as the small parts posed a significant choking hazard.
- Causation: The plaintiffs demonstrated that the defect directly caused the child’s injury.
- Negligence not required: Under strict liability, the plaintiffs did not need to prove that the toy manufacturer was negligent in the design or manufacturing process. It was sufficient to show that the product was defective and caused harm.
This example shows how strict liability works in New York for dangerous children’s products.
The focus is on the product’s condition and its safety, rather than the manufacturer’s conduct. This legal standard aims to protect consumers, particularly vulnerable groups like children, by holding manufacturers accountable for ensuring their products are safe.
Types of product defects in New York law
| Design defects | Manufacturing defects | Marketing defects |
|---|---|---|
| These are flaws in the product’s design that make it inherently unsafe | Errors can occur during the production process that make the product dangerous when it would not be if manufactured correctly | This includes inadequate instructions or warnings that fail to inform consumers of potential risks. |
Design defects specific to children’s products
- Federal and state regulations
Children’s products must comply with both federal and state safety standards. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) sets federal standards, while New York may have additional requirements for a particular item or category of products. - New York General Business Law
This includes provisions specific to the sale of children’s products, such as prohibiting the sale of items that have been recalled or are deemed unsafe. - Lead in children’s products
New York has strict regulations for permissible lead levels in children’s products, which align with federal standards.
Recalls and reporting of dangerous children’s products in New York
- Mandatory reporting. Manufacturers must report any safety issues with their products to the CPSC. Retailers in New York must comply with recall notices and remove dangerous products from shelves.
- Right to sue. Parents or guardians can file lawsuits on behalf of injured children against manufacturers, distributors, and retailers for injuries caused by defective products.
Important New York cases and precedents for dangerous children’s products
Polm v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp.
A lawsuit was filed against Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp. alleging that their baby food contained harmful levels of toxic heavy metals, including lead, arsenic, mercury, and cadmium. The plaintiffs claimed that the company failed to disclose these risks, posing significant health hazards to infants.
The ongoing case has prompted greater scrutiny and regulatory calls for more stringent safety standards in baby food production.
Mattel Inc. lead paint recall
Mattel Inc. faced a significant lawsuit in 2007 following the recall of millions of toys due to lead paint contamination. The toys, including popular items like Barbie accessories and various action figures, were found to have unsafe lead levels, posing severe risks to children.
Mattel agreed to settle the lawsuit by offering refunds and replacements, as well as paying fines. The case led to stricter enforcement of lead regulations in children’s products and increased vigilance in product safety testing.
Fisher-Price Rock ‘n Play Sleeper lawsuit
The Fisher-Price Rock ‘n Play sleeper was linked to multiple infant deaths. Plaintiffs argued that the design of the sleeper was inherently unsafe, leading to suffocation and other fatal injuries. This led to a series of lawsuits.
Fisher-Price issued a massive recall of the Rock ‘n Play Sleeper. The company faced multiple settlements and enhanced regulatory scrutiny, prompting reviews of other infant sleep products.
Evenflo “Big Kid” booster seat lawsuit
Evenflo faced a class-action lawsuit over its “Big Kid” booster seats, which plaintiffs alleged were falsely advertised as safe for children under 40 pounds. The lawsuit claimed that Evenflo misrepresented the safety of the booster seats, resulting in severe injuries during car accidents.
Evenflo denied the allegations but agreed to a settlement that included changes in their marketing practices and compensation for affected families. The case underscored the importance of accurate safety representations in child car seats.
Infantino SlingRider infant deaths
After reports of infant deaths associated with the SlingRider baby sling, manufacturer Infantino faced a significant lawsuit. The plaintiffs contended that the design of the sling posed a suffocation hazard to infants, leading to tragic fatalities.
Infantino recalled the SlingRider and other similar models, providing refunds and replacements to consumers. The case led to increased awareness and regulatory action concerning the safety of baby slings and carriers.
What can you do about defective children’s and baby products in New York?
There is other recourse aside from lawsuits. For instance, the New York State Office of the Attorney General protects consumers by taking action against companies that sell dangerous products for kids and babies.
There are also safety advocates, or a variety of non-profit organizations that lobby the legislature for stricter regulations and standards.
If you have specific questions about a certain type of product or need more detailed legal advice, consult a New York personal injury lawyer who specializes in product liability.
See our guide Choosing a personal injury attorney.