The office of Hodges Walsh & Slater was recently obtained a defense verdict in a products liability trial conducted in the White Plains branch of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The trial was conducted by senior partner, George S. Hodges, assisted by partner Paul E. Svensson along with paralegal Yelena Stifeyeva.

The case, Mark Emig and Allison Emig v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc., Frigidaire, and Best Buy Co., Inc. (case number 06 Civ. 4791) and was tried over the course of 10 days before United States District Court Judge Warren Eginton.

Plaintiff, a 38 year old Executive with IBM, claimed that on July 31, 2004 he sustained a gauging laceration of his right eye resulting in multiple injuries and residual effects, while he was installing the handle of a Frigidaire top mount refrigerator. Emig claimed that the appliance’s instructions were inadequate and that as a result the freezer handle struck and injured his eye.

Mr. Emig sued Electrolux Home Products, Inc. as the manufacturer and Best Buy as the retailer bringing causes of action for negligence, strict products liability and breach of express and implied warranties. The defense was premised upon proof that the instructions were appropriate and complete and that the accident was a result of Mr. Emig’s own actions. Mr. Emig sustained a laceration of the sclera of his eye and loss of part of the iris with residual stigmatism. He underwent multiple surgeries but suffered from a near complete loss of vision of the right eye. He alleged that this resulted in significant impairment of his ability to function as an IBM Executive and to move up the chain of command. In essence, Mr. Emig alleged that he was a “fast-track Executive”, and would have eventually become a Vice-President of IBM had this accident not happened. The plaintiff alleged $5 million dollars for past and future suffering, $37.6 million for past and future lost earnings and benefits along with past medical expenses and loss of consortium on the part of the wife. Plaintiff’s final settlement demand was for $6 million.

No settlement offer was made on behalf of the defendants and the matter proceeded to verdict. The jury rendered a unanimous defense verdict following two hours of deliberations. No appeal was taken from the jury’s verdict.