Lawyers Work to Publicize Risks in Household Products
|
|
A group of lawyers is calling on its members to become whistle-blowers who bring dangerous products to the attention of state and Federal safety officials. A group of lawyers is calling on its members to become whistle-blowers who bring dangerous products to the attention of state and Federal safety officials. The group, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, wants to warn authorities about product dangers that come to light in the course of lawsuits. Government regulators often do not learn of such risks, association officials say, and hazardous products remain on the market. ”They aren’t getting it from the injured or from companies,” said Russ Herman, president of the association, which represents 65,000 product-liability and personal-injury lawyers. ”And they certainly weren’t getting the information from us.” This week, the lawyers’ group announced its first target, a household drain cleaner known as Lewis Red Devil Lye. Citing disclosures in a recent lawsuit, the group claims that the product, made by the Boyle-Midway division of American Home Products Corporation of New York, poses a serious risk of erupting out of drains and should be recalled. Lye attacks skin and eye tissue on contact, causing severe burns. In a statement, Boyle-Midway executives said they believed that the product was safe and blamed any accidents on the failure of users to follow label instructions. Officials at the Consumer Product Safety Commission said that based on information supplied by the lawyers’ group, they have begun tests on Red Devil Lye but thus far have not seen it erupt out of laboratory drains. They also said that any chemical drain cleaner could spatter back under certain conditions. Raising Doubts Consumer groups like the Consumer Federation of America applaud the initiative because they contend that information about product hazards uncovered during lawsuits is often kept secret as a result of agreements commonly used to settle cases. But while some Federal regulators welcomed the move, others said they feared it might trigger a flood of frivolous complaints from lawyers who want to unnerve their opposition. Moreover, lawyers for business groups said they viewed it as a ploy to drum up cases, influence potential jurors and distract attention from legislative moves to limit product-liability awards. ”This is part of an effort to create the perception that manufacturers produce a lot of defective products,” said Phyllis Eisen, the director of risk management for the National Association of Manufacturers, a trade group in Washington. Traditionally, ethics in the law profession have held that a lawyer’s sole obligation is to the immediate client. But some legal scholars say the move by the trial lawyers’ group appears to reflect growing discussions among lawyers about the impact their work has on society. ”Lawyers have had to ask themselves how they would want doctors to behave if they discovered a hazardous material,” said Thomas Morgan, a law professor at George Washington University in Washington. ”So increasingly, we are tending to ask questions and raise doubts about our own roles.” Last year, the Association of Trial Lawyers found its interests dovetailing with those of consumer advocates on the issue of courtroom secrecy agreements. These pacts typically require a plaintiff’s lawyer to return all corporate documents to the defendant and refrain from divulging their contents. As a result, consumer activists have argued, such agreements may suppress safety documents for years. Secrecy agreements are neither illegal nor unethical. In many cases, sealed documents refer only to a company’s trade secrets. More : query.nytimes.com |