Our Blog

Defective toy causing injuries

November 27, 2012

The Step2 Company LLC, manufacturer of many children’s toys is recalling its X-Rider Car. This toy is designed for young children. The toy has a dangerous design, namely it is designed so that it will easily tip forward. When children are riding it, if they lean too far forward on the seat they can fall over the handle bar and hit the ground. As a trial attorney whose clients consist of people who are injured because of other peoples wrong doing, it is especially upsetting and enraging when children are the victims of a manufacturers’ carelessness. Manufacturers are either unaware or choose to ignore the dangers of their designs and this is unacceptable. When consumers buy a product from a store we assume it safe for our little ones to use. Sadly this is not the case.

Children have been injured while playing with the X-Rider Car. Injuries include concussion, and injuries to children’s face and teeth. These toys were sold at Target and other retailers from January 2012 – August 2012 for $25.00. If you have one of these cars in your home, do not allow your child to play with it and contact Step2 to receive a free replacement toy. The contact information can be found here.

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