Mother Files Wrongful Death Action Against Manufacturer of Exploding Gasoline Container
Posted by
Amy RothschildSeptember 04, 2007 11:58 AMRene Green, the mother of twenty (20) year old Jonathon Green, filed wrongful death and survival actions on August 28, 2007, against Blitz, USA, in the Eastern District of Texas. In late winter in Texas, Ms. Green's son was burning brush in a barrel. He tried to pour additonal gasoline onto the brush but the gas container manufactured by Blitz, USA, exploded resulting in the boy becoming covered in gasoline. Jonathon had to be flown to a special Children's Hospital in Arkansas in an attempt to save his live. Unfortunately, the burns were too severe and after being hospitalized and treated for twenty-nine (29) days, Jonathon died.
The complaint filed by Ms. Green states that the gasoline container that her son was using was unreasonably dangerous and states that Blitz, USA is liable under the legal doctrine called strict liability. More specifically, the complaint alleges that the gasoline container was defective in that its design design did not include a a metal device known as a flame arrester which could have been placed into the container's opening to prevent flashback of sparks or flames into the container.
"Flame arresters were first put into industrial gasoline containers in the 1950's and into consumer gasoline containers in 1978." The suit continues, "Defendants had known or should have known for decades that its gasoline containers were susceptible to flashback, i.e., the gasoline vapors ignite, and the flames follow the vapor trail back into the can causing the can to explode and/or spew flames and burning gasoline."
Other claims were stated in the complaint including those for negligence, misrepresentation, breach of warrant and gross negligence.
Ms. Green seeks damages against Blitz, USA for mental anguish, loss of consortium, loss of advice and counsel, funeral expenses, medical care and expenses, physical pain and suffering, disfigurement, and physical impairment. She also seeks punitive damages against the defendant on the basis that Blitz, USA purportedly acted in complete disregard of the safety of those who might come into contact with and be harmed by its defectively designed product.
For more information on this subject matter, please refer to the section on Wrongful Death.