Our Blog

Fire Gel Recall Expands

September 19, 2011

As a products liability attorney in Western New York and the Buffalo area, I am concerned when products reach store shelves with the potential to cause serious injury to its users. The Consumer Products Safety Commission and nine manufacturers of portable gel fuels this week expanded the voluntary recall of this product due to flash fires and burns. The gel can ignite and splatter when fuel is added to an already burning pot.

The risks include tip-over, explosions, and flash fires. The flames tend to start the victims clothes on fire causing severe burns and injuries.

So far 65 people have reported injuries, including two deaths. There also may be other unreported injuries. A list of recalled products is contained on the CPSC web site.

If you have been injured by fuel gel or a similar product you need to contact the injury attorneys at FeroletoLaw who have decades of experience helping families who have been injured by products.

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