Personal Injury
Norfolk Propane Gas Explosion Leads to Federal Safety Alert
As a direct result of our client’s tragic death, a leading federal agency has issued a safety alert regarding nationwide measures to prevent catastrophic propane gas explosions.
On July 17, 2013, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) published a national safety alert in the Federal Register which warns the public of the risks associated with under-odorization of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG). It also advises shippers and carriers on recommended procedures for ensuring that LPG is properly odorized on all modes of transportation.
The PHMSA called the Norfolk gas explosion which killed Nichols and injured seven others the “most notable” of cases it considered.
On July 30, 2010, William Nichols, a 47-year-old electrician was working in the basement of an unfinished condominium at The Village at River’s Edge when it exploded. The structure was demolished. Nichols was buried under burning debris for 70 minutes and suffered burns over 80 percent of his body before he was rescued. Emergency workers responded from 21 nearby cities and towns. He died later that night at a Boston hospital.
The Nichols family was represented by attorney Marc L. Breakstone, of Breakstone, White & Gluck of Boston. In the lawsuit, the Nichols’ family alleged that EnergyUSA had negligently under-filled a new propane tank in the condominium development, causing the chemical odor which had been added to the propane to fade and become undetectable. When a loose fitting on the plumbing caused odorless propane gas to leak into the basement, Nichols and others were unaware of the extreme danger of working in the structure. When a hot water heater pilot ignited, the house exploded in a ball of flames. The remaining structure caved in on Mr. Nichols who was trapped in burning debris for over an hour.
During the litigation, Breakstone discovered that the propane supply company had intentionally under-filled the storage tank to save around $2,000. As a result of this, the chemical odorant in the gas faded out making the leaking gas undetectable.
The family settled its wrongful death lawsuit with EnergyUSA Propane and Smolinsky Brothers Plumbing and Heating for $7.5 million.
New Recommendations
Injection process. LPG is odorized through manual and automated injection. When it is odorized by manual means, the PHMSA recommends quality control checks be conducted. It recommends periodic equipment checks when LPG is odorized through automated means.
New tanks or freshly cleaned tanks. The PHMSA recommends those who fill LPG tanks use quality control measures that ensure LPG has sufficient odorant when it is delivered to end users. It also recommends people who receive new or recently cleaned propane tanks be notified.
Odorization standards. PHMSA recommends that all LPG transported in rail tank car tanks or cylinders be odorized in accordance with the requirements of § 173.315(b)(1), of the Hazardous Materials Regulations, issued by the Department of Transportation.
Read the regulations here.
About Breakstone, White & Gluck
Breakstone White & Gluck has over 100 years of combined experience successfully representing the seriously injured. To learn more, visit our website at www.bwglaw.com.
Toys Recalled in Summer 2013 Pose Choking Hazard, Injury Risks
If you have young children, you have probably logged a few hours watching them play this summer. This joy of parenthood comes with an important responsibility: to make sure their toys are safe.
In the United States, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) regulates the toy industry. Toys for children 12 and under are required to pass third-party testing and certification, but each year, defective toys still make it to store shelves and cause serious injuries and deaths. In 2011, more than 260,000 children were treated for toy-related injuries in the hospital emergency room and 13 were killed, according to the CPSC.
If you are a parent, be vigilant. Start by inspecting your children’s toys every time they play. Check the age labeling. Make sure they are no small parts that pose a choking hazard. When in doubt, set the toy aside and have your children play with something else.
Another way to protect your children is to stay informed. You may not see every toy recall on the TV news, but can visit the CPSC website and social media sites for news on toy recalls. A few recalls from this summer include:
Baby Einstein Musical Motion Activity Jumpers
Kids II voluntarily recalled about 400,000 Baby Einstein Musical Motion Activity Jumpers earlier this month. Another 8,500 activity seats have been recalled in Canada. The toy is linked to 61 injuries.
The hazard is when infants reach out and play with one of the attached toys (the toy with the smiley face), it rebounds back.
Kids II received 100 incident reports, including the 61 injuries. Injuries included bruises, facial lacerations and a 7-month-old boy who sustained a lineal skull fracture. In one case, an adult suffered a chipped tooth.
Kids II, which is based in Atlanta, Georgia, is the product importer. The toy was manufactured in China prior to November 2011. Kids II will replace the defective part for consumers for free. Many models were sold at Target, Toys R Us and Amazon.com between May 2010 and May 2013. Recall notice.
Kolcraft Jeep Liberty Strollers Kolcraft recalled 96,000 strollers in the United States after 39 reports of defective wheels. The inner tube can rupture, causing the wheel rim to fracture and fly off as a projectile. The reports included 18 injuries, most of which occurred when an adult attempted to fill a tire with air. Children and adults reported suffering lacerations, abrasions and contusions.
The stroller was manufactured in China. Kolcraft Enterprises, Inc. of Chicago, Illinois was the product importer. It was sold at Burlington Coat Factory, Sears and Toys R Us and other retailers from June 2010 to June 2013 for between $150 and $180.
Consumers are advised to stop using the defective stroller and contact Kolcraft for free replacement wheels. Recall notice.
“Buff Baby” Baby Rattles
In June, Fred & Friends announced the voluntary recall of 47,500 “Buff Baby” baby rattles in the United States. The rattles, which are designed to look like a dumbbell weight, are designed for children 3 months and older. The rattles were recalled because they pose a choking hazard to young users. The cap can separate and expose the plastic pellets inside to infants. Fred & Friends received two reports of this happening, but no injuries.
The rattles were sold in specialty toy and baby stores nationwide and in Canada, as well as online through Amazon.com and other websites from October 2011 through June 2013.
Consumers are advised to stop using the rattles and contact Fred & Friends for a full refund. Fred & Friends, which is located in Cumberland, Rhode Island, is the distributor. The toy was manufactured in China. Recall notice.
Thermobaby Bath Seats Recalled Due to Drowning Hazard
The Aquababy Bath Ring was recalled after the CPSC determined it does not meet federal safety standards. The product is supposed to hold children secure in the bath, but the design poses a risk for tipping over.
SCS Direct Inc. of Milford, Conn. voluntarily recalled 7,500 of the bath seats. There were no injuries involved in this recall. The seats were designed for children five months to ten months old. It was sold through Amazon.com. Consumers are advised to stop using the product and contact SCS Direct for a $35 refund. Recall notice.
Read More
Amusement Park Accidents are Investigated Differently in Massachusetts and Texas
Student Athlete Concussions Not Being Reported by Massachusetts High Schools
Only 31 percent of Massachusetts high schools and middle schools complied last year with a state law mandating reporting on student athlete concussions. State officials are hoping for greater compliance when new figures come due August 31.
In 2010, Massachusetts passed a law aimed at identifying and preventing concussions among student athletes. Under the law, 689 public and private schools were required to report data for the 2011-2012 academic year. However, only 213 schools submitted figures, and those figures showed that 3,450 students had suffered a head injury or suspected concussion in sports. The figures were recently reported in The Boston Globe.
To encourage reporting this year, the state has changed its form to make deadlines appear more prominent and provide definitions for data.
Massachusetts Law
A concussion is a mild traumatic brain injury caused by a force to the head, such as a fall or car accident. Symptoms typically include headaches, dizziness and memory problems. Left untreated, it can result in long-term brain impairment. In recent years, focus has been on preventing concussions in sports at every level, from the National Football League (NFL) to high schools down to Pop Warner football leagues.
Massachusetts is one of 47 states which have passed so-called “return to play” laws since 2009. The state of Washington passed the first concussion in sports law in 2009.
The Massachusetts sports concussion law requires students, parents and coaches to receive annual training to recognize the signs of a concussion. Students who sustain a concussion are required to sit out and obtain a doctor’s written permission to return to the game.
As a final step, schools must report figures to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH). Public schools and those subject to the rules of the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association (MIAA) must comply with the law.
Sports and recreational activities cause 3.8 million concussions each year in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). When an athlete suffers a concussion, they become at risk for suffering another one. Proper rest is important, and teenagers, along with older adults and young children, are believed to have longer recovery periods.
If you are the parent of a student athlete, summer is a good time to learn about the law. Ask your child’s coach when the school will hold concussion training sessions. You can also read a summary of the Massachusetts sports concussion law.
Related:
State revises concussion reporting after weak response from schools, The Boston Globe.
Product Liability: Retailer Fined $3.9 Million for Illegal Sale of Children’s Clothing with Drawstrings
Last month, a discount retailer agreed to pay one of the largest fines ever issued by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The civil penalty settles allegations over illegal sales of children’s clothing with drawstrings.
The CPSC announced that Ross Stores, based in Pleasanton, California, agreed to pay a $3.9 million penalty and implement compliance programs. From January 2009 to February 2012, the CPSC alleges that Ross Stores knowingly failed to report that it sold or held for sale about 23,000 children’s upper outerwear garments with drawstrings at the neck or waist.
Under federal law, manufacturers, distributors, and retailers must report to the CPSC within 24 hours of learning about a defective product which may create a substantial product hazard. They must also report those which create an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death or fail to comply with CPSC regulations.
In July 2011, the CPSC issued a final rule and determined that children’s upper outerwear garments in certain sizes present substantial product hazards. The ruling should have taken the majority of children’s clothing with neck, hood and waist strings out of stores.
Ross Stores has now been fined twice over drawstring clothing for children. In 2009, it paid a $500,000 fine for failing to report it sold garments between 2006 and 2008.
The CPSC has received over two dozen reports of children suffering injury and wrongful death when clothing drawstrings get caught on playground equipment or vehicle doors. Since passing its 2011 rule, it has issued 8 recalls. In 2011, the CPSC also fined Macy’s $750,000 for selling children’s upper outerwear with drawstrings.
Related:
Ross Stores Fined in Sales of Defective Clothing, New York Times
Massachusetts Boating Accidents Increased in 2012
For Massachusetts boaters, a day on the water resulted in more injuries last year, according to state figures.
In 2012, Massachusetts saw 68 reported boating accidents, resulting in 17 deaths, according to the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. This was an increase from 2011, when there were 46 reported boating accidents and 9 deaths.
Nationally, there was a significant decrease in reported accidents. In 2012, 651 boating accidents were reported, down from 758 in 2011, according to the U.S. Coast Guard.
Massachusetts Environmental Police enforce the state’s boating laws and investigate recreational boat accidents on coastal and inland waters, except private lakes and ponds and those smaller than 10 acres. If you are in a boating accident involving personal injury, death or property damage over $500, you are required to report it.
Our Boston injury attorneys offer these safety tips for boating off Boston Harbor, Cape Cod or your favorite spot:
Wear life jackets. Many drownings and accidents result from failure to wear life jackets or not having appropriate life jackets onboard. In Massachusetts, children under 12 are required to wear life jackets on boats at all times and boats must have one life jacket on board for every passenger.
Life jackets are required for users of personal watercraft, such as Jet Skis.
Avoid alcohol. Avoid alcohol consumption while operating a boat. Alcohol use is involved in up to half of teen and adult deaths associated with water recreation, according to the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention.
Operating a boat under the influence is against the law in every state in the United States. In Massachusetts, the criminal punishment can include imprisonment, fines and a loss of motor vehicle license and boating registration for one year. If a boater causes serious bodily injury to another person, they may be imprisoned for up to 10 years and fined up to $5,000.
Training. The state’s Boat and Recreation Vehicle Safety Bureau offers training, which is mandatory for younger boaters but available to others as well.
Avoid swimming areas. In Massachusetts, boaters are prohibited from operating within 150 feet of shorelines used as swimming areas. You must stay more than 75 feet away from floats and markers that line designated swimming areas.
Beware of other boaters. Travel the permitted speed (generally 45 miles per hour on inland waters) and slow down as you approach other boaters. Your boat’s wake can cause another boat operator to lose control or injure the passengers.
Traveling with passengers. Do not exceed your boat’s passenger limit. Ask all your passengers to wear life jackets, especially young children. When you refuel your boat, ask your passengers to step off the boat. Make sure you have the right amount of food and water.
If you are traveling with children, explain the safe areas to sit, how to properly board the boat and what they cannot touch.
Aging or broken boat equipment. Before each season, have your boat checked for equipment failures. The Coast Guard offers free vessel checks or you ask your local boatyard. You can also check the government boat recall database.
Boating at night. It is best to boat during daylight, but if you go at night, make sure you have the proper navigation lights and limit your passengers so you can focus on operating the boat.
*********
Related:
State Environmental Officials Urge Residents to Follow Safe Boating Practices, Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.
Massachusetts Boating Law Summary, Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.
Trampolines, Inflatable Slides Among Dangers At Swimming Pool
Every year, thousands of people in the U.S. die in drownings. Many of these are young children who drown in swimming pools. Last summer alone, nearly 140 children under age 15 drowned in swimming pools and spa tubs, according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).
While the risk of personal injury and wrongful death from drowning has long been known, new dangers have emerged at pools in recent years. As many homeowners have removed diving boards for safety and insurance reasons, many others are purchasing inflatable slides, sports nets and trampolines to enjoy by the pool.
Two recent Massachusetts cases touch on these risks. Last month, the Supreme Judicial Court ordered a new trial in Dos Santos v. Coleta, where the plaintiff was paralyzed in 2005 when he jumped off a trampoline and struck his head in a two-foot inflatable wading pool. The pool and trampoline were owned by his half brother, the defendant.
The SJC found the trial court judge provided improper instructions when he said the jury could stop deliberating if they concluded the danger of jumping off a trampoline and into the pool was “open and obvious.”
The SJC ruled that the trial judge should have also instructed that a property owner is not relieved from correcting such dangers in cases where they can or should anticipate that the dangerous condition will cause harm.
“Because we conclude that a landowner has a duty to remedy an open and obvious danger, where he has created and maintained that danger with the knowledge that lawful entrants would (and did) choose to encounter it despite the obvious risk of doing so, we now reverse,” wrote Justice Cordy.
The plaintiff, Cleber Coleta Dos Santos, had been playing with his young son on the trampoline when he attempted to flip off and into the pool at his half brother’s Framingham home. He suffered permanent paralysis. His half brother and sister-in-law owned the home, but had moved out a few days prior, leaving the trampoline positioned next to the pool where it could be used in the backyard. The SJC noted that the homeowner disregarded warnings printed on the side of the pool against jumping or diving into the pool.
The Banzai inflatable slide is another product which has caused injury and death in Massachusetts in recent years.
You should not see any Banzai slides for in-ground pools this summer. They were recalled in May 2012, after a woman’s death in Massachusetts and two reports of serious injury in other states. The inflatable slides were designed to sit on the edge of a pool so swimmers can climb to the top and slide down as water sprays. But the structure easily deflated, removing support for the user. It was also easy to knock down, even without windy conditions.
In 2006, a 29-year-old Colorado mother visiting Massachusetts fractured her neck and struck her head while using a Banzai inflatable slide. When she stepped up and started to slide, there was not enough support and her head hit the pavement near the edge of the pool. The slide had been partially deflated. The woman died the next day at a Boston hospital.
In October 2011, a jury in Salem Superior Court ordered Toys R Us to pay more than $20 million to the woman’s family, finding the Banzai slide did not comply with federal safety standards for swimming pool slides. Toys R Us had sold the product to the victim. Amazon.com – the website where the product was sold through – and manufacturer SLB Toys USA settled with the woman’s family after the trial began.
In May 2012, Walmart and Toys R Us recalled 21,000 Banzai slides for in-ground pools, asking consumers to return the product for a full refund. Banzai continues to sell inflatable slides and water castles which are stand alone.
Toys R Us recently appealed the case to the Supreme Judicial Court, arguing the the Consumer Product Safety Commission regulation cited by the woman’s family does not apply to inflatable pool slides, but only to rigid pool slides.
Bike Month: Time for Massachusetts to Think About Safety
This is National Bike Month, when cyclists gather for events and rides all over the country. In Massachusetts, the busiest time is during Bay State Bike Week, which began last weekend. Cyclists from Boston to Springfield to Cape Cod are being encouraged to pedal to and from work in the name of fitness and reducing traffic congestion on the roads.
But along with the fun, Bike Month is a time to ask ourselves and lawmakers if we can make the roads safer to prevent personal injury to bicyclists.
While Boston has been called a world-class cycling city in recent years, safety advocates say we can do better. This month, the League of American Bicyclists dropped the state’s ranking from third to sixth in its 2013 Bicycle Friendly State Rankings, offering these and other suggestions to state officials:
Safe Passing Law. Adopt a safe passing law with a minimum distance of three feet to address bicycle safety.
Vulnerable Road User. Adopt a vulnerable road user law that increases penalties for motorists that injuries or kill bicyclists or pedestrians.
Cell Phone Ban for Drivers. Pass a cell phone ban for all drivers. Currently, Massachusetts bans all drivers from texting while driving but only bans drivers under 18 from talking on their cell phones and driving.
Bicycle Riders Manual. Create a statewide bicycle riders manual with laws, state bike routes and laws for cyclists.
MassBike, the state’s leading advocacy group for cyclists, has been seeking passage of a vulnerable road users bill that increases penalties for drivers who injure or kill a bicyclist or others defined as a vulnerable road user. MassBike first filed a bill with the Massachusetts Legislature in 2011 and refiled a few months ago for the start of the new legislative session.
Under the bill, drivers found guilty of crimes such as motor vehicle homicide or hurting or killing a person while driving drunk would face double the normal fines if the victim is considered a vulnerable road user.
The bill defines vulnerable road users as “a pedestrian or a person operating a bicycle, handcycle, tricycle, skateboard, roller skates, in-line skates, wheelchair, non-motorized scooter or any non-motorized vehicle, or a person riding a horse.”
Additionally, the bill would require violators to take a traffic class and perform 100 hours of community service related to road safety. There would be special penalties for drivers who harass vulnerable users with their vehicles. Meanwhile, victims would be given guidelines for filing civil lawsuits against drivers who assault or threaten them.
Another bill proposed by MassBike is the Bicycle Lane Bill, which would make it a violation for a car to park or stand in a marked bike lane. Boston and some other communities have bans, but MassBike seeks a statewide ban.
Read about other bills filed and supported by MassBike.
Housing Code Violations and Over-Crowding in Boston Student Housing
The fire on April 26, 2013 at 87 Linden Street in Allston, the second serious fire in less than two years on the same block, is a tragic reminder of what can happen with overcrowded, substandard student housing.
The Fire Marshall will now investigate the cause of the Allston fire. In addition, The Boston Inspectional Services Division should examine whether the unit was overcrowded in violation of the Boston Zoning Ordinance, and whether housing codes and accessibility codes were violated. Enforcement of city ordinances is, unfortunately, inconsistent, and usually after the fact. Knowing this, landlords and realty companies frequently violate these ordinances in the name of profits. The victims are often unsuspecting college students. As a result, students, who pay high rents, are subjected to increased risks from their overcrowded housing.
The law in Massachusetts governs how homes must be safely maintained in order to prevent personal injury to occupants of the property. In Boston, zoning ordinances require building owners to declare whether their properties are single-family or multi-family units. In either case, under Boston’s zoning ordinances, under the definition of “family,” no unit may be occupied by more than four unrelated students unless the building meets much stricter building requirements.
It is also generally illegal for a landlord to create bedrooms in basements, and it may be against code to create a bedroom in an attic. No matter how it is configured, every house or apartment must have working smoke detectors throughout the unit.
Once a unit exceeds the four unrelated-occupant threshold, it technically becomes a rooming house, which makes it subject to very strict fire-prevention regulations under M.G.L. c. 148, Sec. 26I and other regulations. For example, a rooming house must have walls and ceilings made from fire-rated materials to slow flames in the event of a fire. Smoke detectors must be in every bedroom,
and must be interconnected. Even more important, every boarding house must have a working sprinkler system. Boarding houses must also meet accessibility guideline and provide multiple means of egress for upper floors, which may include fire escapes.
Real estate brokers and leasing agents share responsibility for student overcrowding and exposure to risk from substandard housing. A quick look at any leasing agent’s website will reveal scores of units available for student occupancy which are intended to house more than four unrelated individuals. Leasing agents collect a single month’s rent, sometimes more, for their services. Since they also take the responsibility to collect signatures on leases, they know exactly how many students will be in the unit. Leasing agents simply cannot claim ignorance of the laws regarding overcrowding.
Who May Be Liable
It is our firm’s opinion that violations of the boarding house rules are evidence of negligence and may create liability for the responsible landlord.
We also believe that knowing and willful violations of the boarding house rules by real estate companies or leasing agents may subject them to liability as well. Violations of these standards may also be violations of the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act, which may subject landlords and their leasing agents to multiple damages and attorneys’ fees.
Other Cases
Injuries and death from substandard housing may also lead to criminal charges against landlords. For example, in January 2012, two absentee landlords were convicted of manslaughter after a fire in an illegal apartment in Quincy led to the deaths of three tenants. The landlords were accused of wantonly violating building and fire codes.
The question of the enforceability of rooming house regulations is also pending at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In that case, civil claims were brought against a Worcester landlord for violation of the Worcester zoning bylaw. In that city, no more than four unrelated persons can occupy a home. The city brought the violation because there were more than four students in the unit. The decision in that case is expected to be handed down in the next few weeks.
Update: The City of Boston later cited the owner of the two-family structure, Anna Belokurova, for running an illegal rooming house and not obtaining the permits needed to create bedrooms in the basement, according to The Boston Globe. Read more.
Related Articles:
Woman killed, firefighters and occupants injured in raging Allston fire, Boston Herald.
One dead, 15 injured in Allston house fire, The Boston Globe.
Jury finds landlords guilty of involuntary manslaughter in Quincy apartment fire, The Patriot Ledger.
About Breakstone, White & Gluck
Breakstone, White & Gluck of Boston has over 85 years combined experience represented injured clients in Massachusetts. If you or a loved one has been injured, learn your rights. For a free legal consultation, contact us at 800-379-1244 or 617-723-7676 or use our contact form.
Dangerous Magnet Toys Recalled by Major Retailers
The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has moved a step closer to taking two dangerous magnet toys out of the hands of children.
On April 12, six retailers voluntarily recalled Buckyballs and Buckycubes. The stores included Barnes & Noble, Brookstone, some Hallmark stores, Marbles the Brain Store and Think Geek.
Maxfield & Oberton Holdings of New York City, the importer and distributor, refused to issue a recall last year, prompting the CPSC to file a lawsuit against the company in July to stop sales. The rare legal action – one of just four taken by the CPSC in the past 11 years – resulted in the company discontinuing its products in October. It stopped doing business in December.
The product was manufactured by Ningo Prosperous Imp. Exp. Co. Ltd. of Ningbo City in China.
Buckyballs and Buckycubes vary in size and color, but they are essentially a ball or cube of small powerful magnets. They were sold in containers of 10 to 216 magnets that can become loose. The first of the two products was introduced in the U.S. in March 2009. Since then, over three million sets of magnets have been sold in U.S. retail stores and online.
Maxfield & Oberton initially marketed Buckyballs to children, calling it “an amazing toy.” It later rebranded the magnet toys as an adult desk toy and stress reliever.
But while the magnets were being marketed to adults, the CPSC was still receiving reports that children were swallowing them. It has received 54 reports of injuries, all but one requiring medical treatment.
CPSC Complaint
The CPSC’s July 25, 2012 complaint alleged that the magnet products had defective labeling and warnings, defective design, and posed a substantial product hazard.
The CPSC began working with the company on labeling three years ago, when the magnets were labeled for use by children “Ages 13+.” The agency said the magnets should have been marketed for age 14 and up.
Maxfield & Oberton changed the labeling and agreed to a voluntary recall of 175,000 magnet toys, but the CPSC said the injuries continued. In its complaint, it states, “…labeling and warning labels cannot guard against the foreseeable misuse of the product and prevent the substantial risk of injury to children.”
Company officials did not agree with the CPSC’s action. In October, they posted a statement on their website that read in part: “We’re sad to say that Balls & Cubes have a one-way ticket to the Land-of-Awesome-Stuff-You-Should-Have-Bought-When-You-Had-the-Chance.”
Dangerous Toy
Over the past few years, the CPSC set up a Magnets Information Center on its website to educate the public about the danger of swallowing magnets.
The risk is that if a child ingests more than one of the powerful magnets, they can become attracted to each other while in the intestines, pinching tissue and damaging the intestinal walls. This can result in a wide range of symptoms, including vomiting, abdominal pain, infection and death. Surgery is often required and becomes more complicated because the magnets can stick to the metal surgical tools.
And in some cases children ingested more than one or two. CBS News reported the case of a 3-year-old Oregon girl who swallowed 37 Buckyballs. The CPSC complaint details cases of other young children who have swallowed numerous magnets.
Related:
CPSC administrative complaint
Recall information for consumers