Archive for negligence – Page 2

SoyNut Butter Co. Sued on the Grounds of E. Coli Contamination

Just a few days after recalling its I.M Healthy SoyNut butter, SoyNut Butter Co. gets sued by parents of an 8-year-old child hospitalized with E. coli after consuming the spread.

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that the boy is one of the 12 people infected with E. coli. So far, the outbreak has been reported in five states — Arizona, Oregon, New Jersey, California, and Maryland. Out of the 12 infected, eleven of them are children.

Erin Simmons and Mosby of California argue that their son was diagnosed with hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) after regularly eating the SoyNut butter, which is the company’s peanut butter substitute. The condition was so dire that the young boy had to undergo a blood transfusion and dialysis — hospitalized at Stanford Children’s Hospital for 21 days.

E. coli (Escherichia coli) is a bacterium that thrives in animals and human’s digestive tracts. A person can become infected with E. coli after getting into contact with stool, or feces, of animals or humans. It mostly happens when you eat food or drink water that is already contaminated by the E. coli bacterium. Out of the many types of E. coli, only a few of them are harmful and may cause the following:

  • Bloody diarrhea
  • Severe anemia
  • Kidney Failure
  • Urinary tract infections
  • Sometimes death

Although the case is still ongoing and we cannot predict what the final judgment will be, there are a few things to understand about this case, which can shape and influence the verdict. These are:

  1. Most cases arising from a food poisoning fall under product liability, meaning that SoyNut Butter Co. may be held liable for selling defective products.
  2. SoyNut Butter Co. could also be held liable for negligence. The company did not provide a safe environment for the production or manufacture of the SoyNut butter.
  3. There is also another possibility that the company may be held liable for breach of implied warranty. This concerns about the notion that products sold to the ordinary consumers should meet their expectations.

The New York MTA Will Sue City for East Harlem Fire That Wreaked Havoc for Metro-North Commuters

A neighborhood plant nursery, a place to pick up soil for windowsill herb gardens or some potted plants to give as a housewarming gift, hardly seems the sort of place likely to house the materials capable of creating an explosive situation, but on May 17, the Urban Garden Center in East Harlem turned out to be combustible. Workers mistakenly poured gasoline onto a generator, causing the lot, which the garden center used to store materials that included flammable fertilizer and wood pallets, to be quickly engulfed in flames. The four alarm fire occurred directly underneath Metro-North train tracks, severely disrupting service to three lines: the Hudson, Harlem and New Haven, all of which run out of Grand Central Station to points north.

MTA-fire-lawsuit-NY-quoteWhile no one was injured, the fire left between 30,000-40,000 commuters stranded in Grand Central on that Tuesday evening, as the MTA worked through the night to try and make enough repairs to allow for limited service for the morning commute on the following Wednesday. In the end, serious structural damage led to major delays and disruptions for a few days for the tens of thousands of people who use those lines during each weekday commute. Now, the MTA has warned that they will file a lawsuit against the city of New York.

Last Wednesday they filed a notice of claim, stating that the fire was due to the city’s “carelessness, negligence and recklessness” in allowing the storage of flammable and explosive substances underneath the elevated railroad tracks. Soon after the accident, Urban Garden Center, was served with four summonses for its storage of gas and propane and an illegal generator. They have since renegotiated their lease and remain open on the same land, which is owned by the Economic Development Corporation of the city, which has also been specifically named in the suit. While the MTA has not commented on the exact amount of damages it will seek in its suit, it has said that it is looking to recoup the lost income from the period of time when the trains were not running, or running at diminished capacity, as well as the cost of repairs to the tracks from the fire.

Both David Mayer, the MTA’s chief safety officer, and a spokesman for the mayor’s office have both stated that in the wake of the fire, an office has been set up to monitor and regulate safety measures regarding the property underneath the train tracks.