Dick’s Sporting Goods Sued Over Dangerous Tree Stand

A man suffered severe and permanent injuries after he fell from a tree stand sold by the popular sporting goods store. The man was on a hunting trip when the tree stand collapsed causing serious injury. The lawsuit claims the tree stand was defective which led to the man’s injuries.

In a case like this, the sporting goods store will usually respond by claiming that the plaintiff failed to use the tree stand properly which led to the fall. However, it becomes more difficult to make this argument given certain pieces of evidence.

While we don’t know how the tree stand broke, ripped straps, cracked parts, and other forensic evidence will help prove that it was the tree stand and not the operator that was defective.

Manufacturer versus supplier lawsuits 

In some cases, a manufacturer is a supplier. But usually, they are two different entities. In this case, it’s unclear if Dick’s manufactures anything at all. However, lawsuits can be filed against both the manufacturer and the supplier for placing a dangerous product into the stream of commerce without testing it first. Typically, however, the strongest arguments are made against the manufacturer and secondary lawsuits are filed against the supplier.

When is a manufacturer liable? 

The manufacturer is almost always liable if someone is injured in the expected use of their product. While you can’t hit yourself over the head with a hammer and file a product liability lawsuit, if the hammer breaks off and smacks your head, that lawsuit will always be winnable. However, the law makes a distinction between defective products and manufacturing defects.

A defective product is considered intrinsically defective. That means that it was manufactured correctly and it’s still defective. This is where recalls come from. A single defective product indicates that something happened during manufacturing. A lot of defective products indicate that the product’s design is faulty.

When is the supplier liable? 

The supplier is almost always held to the same standard as the manufacturer. So, they do end up paying for these cases. On the other hand, the manufacturer pays the most because they were the first in the chain of events that led to injury. So, it almost always happens that the manufacturer and the distributor are codefendants together.

In this case, the plaintiff accuses Dick’s of failing to conduct a proper safety check of the tree stand.

Who wins? 

It all comes down to the tree stand and how it broke. If the plaintiff can establish that a strap broke or one of the parts cracked, then the case will easily be decided in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants will blame the plaintiff for failing to set up the tree stand properly. He will need to establish that the tree stand was properly set up.

Talk to a Florida Personal Injury Lawyer Today 

Halpern, Santos & Pinkert represent the interests of Florida residents injured by dangerous products. Call our Florida personal injury lawyers today to schedule a free consultation and learn more about how we can help.

Source:

topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/recalls/dicks-lawsuit-claims-faulty-tree-stand-caused-man-to-fall-suffer-injuries/