Our Blog

1.7 Million Little Tikes Toys Recalled

September 28, 2011

As a product liability attorney I am always concerned when unsafe children’s’ toys make it to the marketplace.

The Consumer Products Safety Commission today reported that Little Tikes is recalling 1.7 million workshop and tool set toys due to a choking hazard. The recall is an expansion of a 2009 recall of about 1.6 million workshop sets and trucks with the same toy nails. The new recall involves an additional 11 models.

Some children have choked on a toy nail that comes with the product. The product was sold over a 15 year period. There are many different types of sets that are included. Please click on the link above for a description and photo of the different types subject to the recall. This is yet another example of a children’s product that appears to be inadequately tested before reaching store shelves. Please contact our firm if you or your family has been injured by this product.

Request Your Free Consultation

Get the answers and support you need. Our friendly and experienced Buffalo personal injury lawyers will take the time to understand your case, explain your options, and guide you every step of the way.

Our Practice Areas

Read More Articles

Ohio Court Finds Employment Agreement Unenforceable That Requires Attorney to Return 95% of Fees

Amusement Park Must Keep Patrons Safe

As an attorney who has handled many amusement park injury cases against parks like Six Flags and others, I am concerned when employees continue to fail to keep their patrons safe. An employee of the park knows the ride better than the customers and it is that persons

Read Blog
Ohio Court Finds Employment Agreement Unenforceable That Requires Attorney to Return 95% of Fees

Fall Was The Result Of Elevated Related Risk

In, NICOMETI v. THE VINEYARDS OF FREDONIA, LLC (June 2013) the Fourth Department held that contrary to the contention of defendants, the Supreme Court properly concluded that plaintiff’s fall was the result of an elevation-related risk for which Labor Law § 240 (1) provides protection.

Read Blog
Ohio Court Finds Employment Agreement Unenforceable That Requires Attorney to Return 95% of Fees

Sovereign Immunity Grounds Do Not Always Apply

In Sue/Perior Concrete & Paving v. Lewiston Golf Course Corporation, (4th Dept. 2013) the court held that “The central question on this appeal is whether defendant Lewiston Golf Course Corporation (LGCC), a corporation formed under the laws of the Seneca Nation of Indians (Nation or SNI), is protected

Read Blog