data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4e760/4e7607087a4154fc97bb1d74057f50d0b7edd08b" alt="Mailmate paper shredder"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/99d9e/99d9e9185df8e46a628ff3b3f217927fe8e0b51c" alt="mailmate paper shredder mailmate paper shredder"
Tipton claims that the MailMate has a pull force nearly twice as strong as other home paper shredders. Tipton further notes that the average toddler of Madalyn’s age at the time is 30 to 36 inches. Tipton avers that the small size of the shredder (11 inches) makes it easily accessible to small children Dr. Tipton the MailMate contains no safety features that would protect curious children. Accordingly, he argues, “the presence of children” around the MailMate Paper Shredder is “eminently foreseeable.” Nevertheless, according to Dr. Steven Tipton, notes that Staples markets the MailMate Paper Shredder for “Home Office/Small Business” use. In his expert report, Plaintiffs’ expert, Dr. Further, as Plaintiffs argue, the letter Staples received from the CPSC contains numerous deficiencies which undermine its persuasive value.The Court concludes that Plaintiffs have produced sufficient evidence such that a reasonable jury could conclude that the MailMate Paper Shredder at issue contains certain design defects which render it unreasonably dangerous. The fact that the CPSC apparently did not require corrective action from Staples after Staples reported an unspecified incident or incidents to it is no basis for granting summary judgment. A reasonable jury could still find Defendants strictly liable even if they complied with UL requirements or other industry-wide practices.Likewise, Defendants’ assertion that they complied with the recommendations of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) is also unavailing. Evidence of compliance is not, therefore, dispositive of whether or not a product is defective. Staples and Executive Machines (defendants) moved for summary judgment.JUDICIAL OPINIONTUCKER, Chief JudgeSection 402A makes sellers liable for harm caused to consumers by unreasonably dangerous products even if the seller exercised reasonable care.Defendants have argued the MailMate Paper Shredder was not defective because it received a “UL certificate.” Evidence of compliance with industry standards goes only to the reasonableness of the Defendants’ design choices. Thomas, on behalf of Madalyn (plaintiffs), brought suit against the manufacturer of the paper shredder and Staple’s, alleging strict liability, negligence, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, and compensatory and punitive damages. Madalyn’s two partially amputated fingers could not be reattached.Mr. Subsequently, Madalyn was transported to Wilkes–Barre Hospital for initial examination and then transported to Hershey Medical Center, where surgery was performed.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4fbca/4fbca9a755ed1ebf7f6026a3306b16e91cf40bea" alt="mailmate paper shredder mailmate paper shredder"
Jason was able to extract Madalyn’s hand from the shredder with the use of a crowbar. Upon realizing that Madalyn’s fingers were stuck in the shredder, Amy unplugged the machine.Amy does not recall whether there was noise coming from the machine when Madalyn’s fingers became stuck, whether Madalyn pulled away from her in order to reach out to the machine, or whether any portion of the envelope she had placed in the machine was still in the process of shredding. Having made no attempt to unplug or turn off the shredder, Amy turned away from Madalyn to get Madalyn some candy as Amy turned back around to face Madalyn, she saw that Madalyn’s left hand had become stuck in the shredder.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9a305/9a3059601361a906bd079cb0e103135f8d032ab1" alt="mailmate paper shredder mailmate paper shredder"
At this point, while the shredder was still operating, Amy picked up Madalyn and placed her on her left hip. In using the machine, either Jason or Amy would stand in front of the counter and insert material into the machine to be shredded.On May 25, 2008, Amy Thomas was shredding mail in the MailMate Paper Shredder when their 19-month-old daughter, Madalyn, started crying and began to pull on Amy’s leg.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/123e6/123e6aea0b197d708afc629e0d90c0197c430034" alt="mailmate paper shredder mailmate paper shredder"
The shredder was placed on a countertop in the Thomas’ kitchen, routinely used there for the purpose of keeping their “junk mail” under control to prevent identity theft. In choosing the paper shredder, Amy Thomas said that her main considerations were that the shredder be compact and easy to use. com on November 15, 2006, a shredder manufactured, assembled, and distributed by Executive Machines d/b/a Jeam Imports. 2014)FACTSAmy Thomas (married to Jason Thomas) purchased the MailMate Paper Shredder online from Staples. This problem has been solved: Solutions for Chapter 13.C7 Problem 1CQ: Thomas v Staples, Inc.2 F.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4e760/4e7607087a4154fc97bb1d74057f50d0b7edd08b" alt="Mailmate paper shredder"