New Jersey Pressure Cooker Lawsuit Attorney

Pressure cookers have revolutionized the way we cook, offering convenience and speed like never before. However, with this innovation comes a darker side – a growing number of New Jersey pressure cooker lawsuit cases and similar incidents across the nation.

Suppose you or someone close to you has experienced injuries caused by a pressure cooker. In that case, the committed team at Schmidt & Clark, LLP, is ready to offer their support. As a nationally renowned law firm specializing in cases on behalf of plaintiffs, our main objective is to ensure that you receive the justice and fair compensation to which you are entitled.

New Jersey Pressure Cooker Injury Lawsuits

New Jersey has seen an uptick in pressure cooker lawsuits in recent years. Companies such as TriStar have faced numerous claims due to defective products leading to severe burns and injuries. When boiling liquid comes into contact with the skin, it can result in 3rd and 2nd-degree burns, which can be serious and should not be taken lightly.

Individuals within a 5-10 foot radius of the pot are at risk of sustaining substantial burn injuries. Burns are the most frequent injury caused by defective TriStar pressure cookers. This can have serious implications on victims’ health and daily lives.

Suppose you or a loved one has experienced injury or burns resulting from a Tristar or Cuisinart pressure cooker explosion. In that case, it is recommended that you contact a law firm that has considerable expertise in taking legal action against manufacturers of defective pressure cookers.

Which Pressure Cooker Brands Are Named in The Lawsuits?

Pressure cooker brands that are named in the lawsuits include Instant Pot, Elite Bistro, Wolfgang Puck, and Breville have been named in pressure cooker lawsuits. Instant Pot pressure cookers have also been the subject of lawsuits. TriStar electric pressure cookers have a significant issue with their design.

This issue can cause the device to pressurize even if the lid is not properly secured. Tristar Power Cooker models PC-WAL1 and PC-TR16, as well as Power Pressure Cooker XL models PPC-770-1, PPC-770, PPC-780, PPC-780P, PPC-790 and PCXL-PRO6 have been mentioned in the lawsuit [1]. The pressure cooker’s lid malfunction is one of the main issues in these cases.

Tristar claims that the Emeril Lagasse Electric Pressure Cooker Plus is equipped with several “Built-In Safety Devices,” including:

• a “lid safety device”
• a “spring-loaded safety device”
• a “backup safety release valve”
• a “magnetic sensor for the lid”

However, the Bella pressure cooker lawsuit has also been filed due to similar issues.

Plaintiff Claims in Pressure Cooker Injury Lawsuit

Plaintiffs in defective pressure cooker injury lawsuits, including those involving the Instant Pot pressure cooker, allege that faulty safety features and design flaws have resulted in explosions, causing significant burns and injuries.

Pressure cooker explosions are attributed to malfunction, faulty safety mechanisms, and design flaws. The TriStar Power Pressure Cooker was found to have design flaws that posed a risk of ejection of boiling liquids, which could result in serious burns and other injuries.

TriStar has a legal obligation to ensure their pressure cookers adhere to certain minimum safety standards. In response to the incident reports, TriStar initiated collaboration with its Chinese manufacturing partner to implement various design modifications. However, TriStar did not institute a recall or discontinue sales of its Power Pressure Cooker, nor did it include any warning on its devices.

The pot component of a pressure cooker is vital for its functionality as a pressure chamber. It must be locked properly with the pressure cooker’s lid for the safe functioning of the cooker. The generated steam elevates the internal temperature of the pot.

This, in turn, increases the internal air pressure. The pot allows the temperature to exceed the regular boiling point. This allows for cooking meals quickly and effectively. Should a pressure cooker be opened prior to steam having escaped the entirety of the pot, it will result in an “explosion” of the contents inside once it is released.

Pressure Cooker Recalls and Safety Concerns

In its inception, pressure cooking was deemed dangerous due to the serious risks posed. As consumer demand for more options increased, innovations in pressure cooker design began to emerge. Currently, the modern electric pressure cooker is heavily promoted as being both secure and straightforward to use.

Instant Brands have recalled over 100,000 Gem 65 8-in-1 Multi-cookers due to the potential of overheating and fire hazards. Breville also recalled their Fast Slow Cooker due to the risk of explosion. The safety valve helps to release pressure before the lid is opened. It is available in both manual and electric versions.

The pressure cooker has been in existence since the 1670s, with its introduction to the market as “Papin’s Digester,” which was named after its inventor, French-born physicist Denis Papin.

This highlights the long history of pressure cookers and the ongoing need for safety improvements and recalls to ensure consumer safety.

Common Pressure Cooker Injury

The most frequent pressure cooker injuries are [2]:

• 2nd and 3rd-degree burns
• Eye damage
• Vision loss
• Deep lacerations from exploding devices

The sudden release of liquid triggers pressure cooker explosions, which is akin to a shaken soda can bursting upon opening. The explosion occurs before the pressure has been reduced to a safe level.

Steam explosions in pressure cookers happen when boiling-hot steam under pressure is suddenly released, resulting in a rapidly expanding cloud of steam that can cause extensive scalding burn injuries to anyone in the vicinity.

Pressure cooker explosions can also take place when the lid is able to be rotated and opened while the pressure cooker is still under pressure, allowing its scalding hot contents to be forcefully ejected from the pressure cooker and onto the user.

An example of a serious injury resulting from a pressure cooker explosion is a 79-year-old woman in Miami who experienced a near-fatal incident when her pressure cooker exploded, resulting in the amputation of her leg. This tragic case illustrates the severity of injuries that can occur from pressure cooker explosions and the importance of ensuring product safety.

Pressure Cooker Lawsuit Settlement Amounts in New Jersey

Settlement amounts in New Jersey pressure cooker lawsuits have reached millions of dollars, with one case involving a toddler resulting in a $27 million settlement. On average, second-degree burns may be compensated with a settlement of $125,000 to $200,000. At the same time, more severe injuries may be awarded a settlement of $600,000 to $1 million.

Another example of a pressure cooker lawsuit settlement is a California couple obtaining a settlement against Maxi-Matic USA and Kohl’s Department Stores after their pressure cooker exploded, causing the wife to sustain serious burn injuries.

“If you have suffered harm due to a pressure cooker explosion and believe your accident occurred due to faulty manufacturing, you may be owed compensation for your losses.”- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)

These examples demonstrate the financial impact of pressure cooker injury lawsuits and the potential for compensation for victims.

Filing a New Jersey Pressure Cooker Lawsuit

Initiating a pressure cooker lawsuit in New Jersey requires the following steps:

1. Reach out to a product liability lawyer for prompt legal assistance.
2. Furnish evidence of injury.
3. Demonstrate the manufacturer’s negligence in maintaining product safety.

It is crucial to seek legal help and present evidence of injury and manufacturer’s negligence to proceed with the lawsuit.

The process for determining liability and initiating a lawsuit involves consulting with a legal professional, collecting pertinent evidence, and submitting the lawsuit.

If a pressure cooker explosion has injured you or a loved one, don’t hesitate to contact a product liability lawyer for a free case evaluation. They can help guide you through the legal process and ensure you receive the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

FAQs

Can I receive a free legal consultation for a pressure cooker lawsuit in New Jersey?
Many law firms offer free initial consultations to discuss the merits of your case. This allows you to explore your legal options without financial commitment.

What should I do if I suspect my injury is linked to a defective pressure cooker?
Document the incident and your injuries, retain the pressure cooker and related materials, seek medical treatment, and consult with a lawyer experienced in product liability litigation. Prompt action is essential for a strong case.

Are there safer alternatives to pressure cookers?
Yes, there are various cooking appliances that offer similar functionalities to pressure cookers but with enhanced safety features. Researching and selecting products with high safety ratings can help mitigate risks.

Related Articles:

• Nebraska Pressure Cooker Lawsuit
• New Hampshire Pressure Cooker Attorney
• Nevada Pressure Cooker Lawsuit

See all related product liability lawsuits our attorneys covered so far.

Get Your Free Case Review From New Jersey Pressure Cooker Lawyers

Schmidt and Clark, LLP are here to provide you with essential support when it’s most crucial. If you or a family member has suffered from injuries related to a pressure cooker, please feel free to get in touch with us without hesitation. Our team is highly experienced in handling such cases. It is fully prepared to assist you at every stage of the process.

You have the right to be well-informed about your legal rights and potential eligibility for a pressure cooker explosion lawsuit. Be assured that our consultations are always free, and you will not have any expenses unless we achieve a favorable outcome for your case.

Contact Schmidt and Clark today for a thorough assessment of your situation. Allow us to be your trusted partner on this journey.

Reference:

1. https://www.classaction.org/media/chapman-v-tristar.pdf
2. https://misuse.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/error/abuse.shtml