Man Claims E-Smoke Exploded in His Face

[Toronto_Mike]

And yet another one! This time we have info................................Courthouse News Service


Why did he not sue himself for being stupid? Buying batteries from Radio Shack? Sheesh!




Man Claims E-Smoke Exploded in His Face
By KEVIN KOENINGER
ShareThis


DENVER (CN) - A man was hospitalized for eight days after an electronic cigarette exploded in his face, sending "burning debris and battery acid into his mouth, face, and eyes," the e-smoker claims in Federal Court.
Phillip Hahn sued Pure Enterprises dba Puresmoker.com and Ignition L.P., on a variety of charges, and his wife sued for loss of consortium.
Hahn says he "purchased a Prodigy V3.1 electronic cigarette device from Pure Enterprises' online store, at the website address of puresmoker.com."
After buying the proper batteries from a (nonparty) RadioShack the next day, "Phillip Hahn was using the Prodigy energized by the Enercell batteries at his residence when the Enercell batteries inside the Prodigy suddenly and unexpectedly exploded," the complaint states.
"The explosion sent burning debris and battery acid into Phillip Hahn's mouth, face, and eyes, and as a result, Phillip Hahn sustained catastrophic injuries.
"At all times relevant hereto, Theresa Hahn was in the zone of danger and contemporaneously observed the incident and Phillip Hahn's injuries and immediately called 911.
"Phillip Hahn was transported by ambulance to Northern Colorado Medical Center where he remained for eight (8) days."
The Hahns claim the defendants made numerous false claims about their product, including "'USA-Made High Quality,' ... and 'thousands of hours of research, design and testing have resulted in the high-caliber devices you see here today.'"
They seek damages for product liability, defective design and manufacture, negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress, failure to warn, and other charges.
They are represented by Arron Nesbitt with Taylor Anderson.

 

[SoUnique]

I read that article, will be interesting to follow the court case. Apparently the batts came from Radio Shack, I believe the article said.

 

[KillFace]

Sounds like those aren't the right batteries.....alkaline? *sigh*

 

[Yelsew Skraps]

see this thread Here

 

[Toronto_Mike]

see this thread Here

Thanks, but I included the thread on the 1st line of the post. I guess I could have made it more clear.

 

[CanuckVapour16]

Either way I don't think puresmoker is going to be able to survive after this. Covering court costs etc in the US is pricey so I imagine even if they win, they will lose. Too bad but I hope the reporting is competent enough to show that apparent "mis-use" of the product led to its failure and not the product itself.

 

[Toronto_Mike]

From the FAQ section of puresmoker website :

Legal: These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Information and statements made are for educational purposes and are not intended to replace the advice of your health care professional. By purchasing these products, you agree to use the products at your own risk. Under no circumstances will PureSmoker be held responsible or liable, directly or indirectly, for any loss or damage that is caused or alleged to have been caused in connection with use of, or reliance on any product on this site.

Let's see that hold up in court.

 

[Yelsew Skraps]

Sorry, the link in the first post just took me to the article itself, I had posted the other thread here on ECF on this topic that has about 6 pages worth of posts so far today on this one....

 

[WolfeReign]

Why did he not sue himself for being stupid? Buying batteries from Radio Shack? Sheesh!

I guess you can say that i am stupid as well after going to The Prodigy V3.1 and looking at the specs of the prodigy V3.1, it says Battery Type: AW 17670 when i did a google search i found that the battery was like this AW 17670 Protected Rechargeable Lithium Battery

After reviewing the manual for it Prodigy it did not say you could use the radio shack (known as the source in canada) nor did it say you cannot use them.

I am not trying to defend the guy, i am just saying that if it must be a specific battery and nothing else a little more info is needed....what if he was a n00b just starting out and did not know?

 

[Toronto_Mike]

Sorry, the link in the first post just took me to the article itself, I had posted the other thread here on ECF on this topic that has about 6 pages worth of posts so far today on this one....

It was my bad - you linked the thread which was correct - I had a link to the article. 2 different links.

I'm wrong for trying to correct it.

Thanks again,

 

[KillFace]

I guess you can say that i am stupid as well after going to The Prodigy V3.1 and looking at the specs of the prodigy V3.1, it says Battery Type: AW 17670 when i did a google search i found that the battery was like this AW 17670 Protected Rechargeable Lithium Battery

After reviewing the manual for it Prodigy it did not say you could use the radio shack (known as the source in canada) nor did it say you cannot use them.

I am not trying to defend the guy, i am just saying that if it must be a specific battery and nothing else a little more info is needed....what if he was a n00b just starting out and did not know?

In that, case, wouldn't it be his responsibility to.....you know.....find out?

Even if he thought, "I'm gonna save a few bucks and get the batteries at Radio Shack.....I wonder if they're safe....maybe I could ask people online?" Would've taken 1 minute to do.

/Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

 

[Rocketman]

If he asked here on ECF , would Protegy users tell him to use a 17670 single cell, or would they tell which little batteries to stack in it?

Regardless what is recommended by the vendor, the experts here will recommend one type of little cells to stack for 6 volts and another type for 7 volts.

Which type does the vendor recommend for stacking?

and how many follow that recommendation?

 

[SoUnique]

Regardless it's unfortunate. At this stage of the game in Canada we don't need the negativity attached to the use of e-cigs.

 

[ambeck22]

Hmm...My device and battery place is very adamant about getting the correct batteries and only those batteries for their device. I never buy them elsewhere, especially not RadioShack. Sorry it happened, but it's RadioShack, not VapeShack.

 

[Concat]

They have to prove that Puresmoker was negligent. If they can do that, then the family should be compensated. Let's not jump to anyone's defense here. We don't even know WHY it blew up. I imagine the court would need to hear expert testimony regarding that. "Spontaneous explosion" isn't sufficient. For all we know it could be the battery that had a defect, or he stacked batteries the wrong way around.

I mean, if you look at the claims, it seems to me the lawyers threw in everything and the kitchen sink, from negligence to defective design, to failure to warn. Who knows what will stick, if anything.

 

[fuzzione]

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? It became extinct with the invention of lawyers and insurance companies. The game is called personal injury litigation. 95% of such actions never see a courtroom and are settled out of court. The aggrieved or injured party's lawyers paint a picture of risk for the defendant's insurers to induce negotiations and an eventual settlement but only after the lawyers have made their fees. Genuine fault rarely enters the equation; the factors primarily considered are the extent of injury or damages, the economics of continuing the case and an estimation of ultimate risk in a courtroom environment for each involved party.

It is typical in such actions that everyone and their uncle will be named in the suit....manufacturers, retailers, etc., and each party's insurers will generally throw something into the settlement pot to extricate themselves relatively economically. Every conceivable allegation and defence is pleaded in the procedural paperwork to cover all possible contingencies for the circumstances at issue. It is also typical that injured parties in such circumstances rarely walk away with nothing, irrespective of their own culpability. Such legal scenarios are routinely dealt with thousands of times each and every day on our continent. It is, simply, the society we all live in. I would bet money this case never sees the inside of a courtroom.

 

[Yelsew Skraps]

Had a long post about Tort reform and then realized I am not outside and deleted it, and just liked fuzzione's post instead

 

[WolfeReign]

In that, case, wouldn't it be his responsibility to.....you know.....find out?

Even if he thought, "I'm gonna save a few bucks and get the batteries at Radio Shack.....I wonder if they're safe....maybe I could ask people online?" Would've taken 1 minute to do.

/Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Touche lets say he has a computer (as only 20 or 30% or north American populous owns one), there is still the sense that if you ask a question you still seem to have a ton of people dog pile you saying what you are using is not good enough and you need higher power/ bigger tanks/ larger lungs for the pull etc...so that in itself drives people away from asking online.

If it was not for vape bunny using her head more then me, ECF would not have been found when i started out on the fuma's, i mean there seems to be a lack of real time print outs and information going around.......

Now that being said, i do find it a bit frivolous that though it clearly says the supplier would not be held responsible that he is up and suing the company. I mean this reminds me of the case's of McDonald's get sued for not saying their hot coffee was *gasp* hot.

If this joker wins, then i think i am going to sue the makers of ice cream, as it is not listed as being cold....when you drop it in your lap.......

 

[fuzzione]

Had a long post about Tort reform and then realized I am not outside and deleted it, and just liked fuzzione's post instead

LOL. Too bad...I would have enjoyed reading your post. Wasn't it Texas that essentially invented the warning label appearing on ladders that you could actually fall off them?

 

[ChellyNelly]

Here's my reply from the other thread:

Now, here's natural selection at work! Some damn idiot trying to save himself a couple bucks on BATTERIES - THE MOST IMPORTANT PART!!! by going to Radioshack and getting something that he probably thought "looked the same" as the ones on the site. The .......n page for the product he bought says right on it what batteries to use and it's certainly not (removed symbols) ENERCELL from RADIOSHACK?!?! Come on now! Why didn't he just buy the full kit, you say? He probably couldn't afford the mod to begin with and so he thought he was pulling a fast one on everyone who buys the kit that they recommend you buy with the Prodigy - joke's on him now. Dumbass.

Even if my scenario isn't true, it still clearly states on the website what batteries are to be used and they're available for purchase with the damn mod so he is responsible for being a total dough-head and knowing absolutely nothing about batteries - not even enough to know that if you put the wrong batteries in something that makes it's circuit RIGHT IN YOUR MOUTH, that it could possibly - no, DEFINITELY - be dangerous. I have no sympathy, empathy, or anything. God is thinning the herd, IMO.

And not only am I ...... off about this idiot making all of us look like idiots, but I'm ...... off at the news page that the article is on, and their stupidity. They didn't even open the page they mentioned so many times in the article long enough to see that the (removed symbols) Enercell from Radioshack is NOT RECOMMENDED or mentioned ANYWHERE on the website. Nor did they see what battery is recommended and right there available for purchase?!?! So they're idiots too. Wow, the world sucks.