California – The Family of a 9 year-old boy is sueing Coleman, the manufacturer of propane heaters, for a faulty heater that exploded. The boy received severe burns from the explosion.
The law firm of Bisnar l Chase is representing the boy and his family. The family’s lead attorney, Brian Chase, states that Coleman knew that its propane heater was defective because the company received numerous complaints, warranty claims and was aware of other explosions and incidents involving the same heater. The heater has been identified as Model 5053 ProCat™ PefecTemp™ Coleman propane heater.
“This appears to be a case of a manufacturer using a faulty design, sub-par critical parts and inadequate quality control leading to the catastrophic injury of a then 7-year-old boy,” said Orange County personal injury lawyer John Bisnar, founding partner of the Bisnar | Chase law firm.
“When the family bought the heater, it was packaged in a box showing its use in a house with a mom holding a baby on her lap,” noted Brian Chase. “The statute clearly states that non-vented portable heaters cannot be sold for use indoors. On the side of the box, and on top of the box, the copy indicated that it was safe for home use.”
The case is pending before a California appellate court. The court is being asked to decide whether a trial judge was correct in ordering Coleman to release key documents that may show whether the company knowingly violated a California statute, Health and Safety Code Section 19881.
The trial court had stated that the confidential documents should be turned over to the boy’s family because they may show that Coleman enlisted the services of lawyers to circumvent California’s laws regarding the safety or hazard of its product. This is known as the “fraud” exception to the attorney-client privilege. This means documents that might be ordinarily protected by the privilege may be discoverable if the documents show that the attorney was used to commit a crime or engage in fraud.
Davis Law Group wishes the Bisnar l Chase law firm success in pursuing this matter. This is a very important case against Coleman, because it goes to the heart of how powerful corporations can knowingly manufacture unsafe products and then try to shield this knowledge from the public. This appears to be a classic case of a corporation attempting to maximize profits at the expense of the public’s safety. Hopefully, the California appeals court will see through Coleman’s deception and uphold the trial judge’s decision.
on Jun 11th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Nice post! Would you mind if we reposted on http://lawinjury.com/blog/ ?
on Dec 20th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
I think it is incident if we operate propane heater not-properly. I have objective opinion that some of Coleman heater products especially propane model, must be expired max 3 years or less to get safety guarantee. And don’t forget to always be careful about the pressurized tank that hold propane fuel if we use propane heater.
Thank you.