Our Blog

Attention Hunters: Tree stand Recall

October 31, 2012

With regular deer season opening in a few weeks, November 17th, 2012 the hunter in your family may be in the market for a new tree stand. While tree stands provide an excellent view and vantage point for shooting, they are dangerous. The CPSC recently announced the recall of Rivers Edge Tree Stands. The snap hook assemblies on this brand can fail causing the tree stand and hunter to fall to the ground.

If you own one of these tree stands, stop using it immediately and contact Rivers Edge Tree Stands, Inc. for replacement parts. They can be reached at (866) 527-9690. As a personal injury attorney I am always concerned when a dangerous product gets put on the market allowing unsuspecting people to buy and use the products. Hunting, while a satisfying sport, is dangerous. In an ideal world hunters should be concerned about where their rifles are pointed and not whether their tree stand will collapse under them. Even if your tree stand has not been recalled, always wear a harness. It will not interfere with your shot when worn properly and will potentially save your life.

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