Rose Art Industries, Llc – Describe the Company and the Product Safety Issue That Lead to the Lawsuit
Describe the company and the product safety issue that lead to the lawsuit:
Rose Art Industries, LLC is a manufacturer of crayons, school supplies, children’s toys and other craft items. In 2005 they were purchased by Mega Brands, a global manufacturer and seller of children’s toys but products are still sold under the Rose Art brand. Our study begins in 2003 when Rose Art launched Magnetix, a construction building set made up of plastic pieces embedded with small magnets and steel balls that can be used as connectors between them. (Exhibit A) As early as 2004 the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) began receiving complaints about the magnets falling out of the plastic pieces claiming them to be defective. The concern with the defect was that small children could easily swallow the small pieces after they fall out or the children could dislodge the magnets themselves. Similar complaints were also made directly to Rose Art and responses to parents were that the magnets were not a choking hazard and were non-toxic.
In November of 2005, 22 month old Kenny Sweet Jr. died as a result of ingesting eight of the Mega Brand magnets. The small magnets are very strong (Exhibit 2) and once ingested the magnets pinched together the loops of his small intestines and strangled the blood supply. When Kenny began to display sick symptoms his parents thought their son was dealing with a stomach bug and did not take him to receive medical attention until it was too late. (Callahan, 2007) Prior to Sweet’s death, William Finley swallowed three loose magnet pieces at his preschool which cut a hole in his bowels allowing bacteria to spill into his abdomen. Emergency surgery saved his life.
It would seem that the strength of the magnets is the safety issue but the root issue is the defect of the plastic pieces as well as the lack of warnings. In March 2006 the CPSC issued a warning about the product but Mega Brands did not voluntarily recall the product or provide additional warnings regarding its safety. In 2007 the CPSC revised its warning of the product and acknowledged over 1,500 reported cases of magnets separating from the plastic pieces, one reported death, one aspiration and 27 intestinal injuries. While parents may expect children to put things in their mouth and even ingest things they should not, they hope that the toys they buy for their children are safe and will not fall apart. The product makers and CPSC were also made aware of issues related to safety of magnets in children’s toys as well as defect complaints from parents and teachers. Appendix A. provides a timeline of warnings and complaints related to magnets in children’s toys and Magnetix.
Discuss the legal theories used by the plaintiff to recover in this lawsuit, how the lawsuit was resolved, and why you agree with the decision in the case.
In 2006 Sweet’s family along with 13 other families