Vive La Fete Recalls Children’s Pajamas Due to Violation of Federal Flammability Standard

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product because the product could cause personal injuries or death due to product liability. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Name of product:

Children’s two-piece pajama sets

Hazard:

The pajamas fail to meet federal flammability standards for children’s sleepwear, posing a risk of burn injuries to children.

Consumer Contact:

Vive La Fete at (800) 535-7396 from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, online at www.vivelafete.com and click on “Product Recall” at the bottom of the page under the “Shopping With Us” section.

Description

This recall involves Vive La Fete children’s cotton or cotton/polyester two-piece pajama sets with style numbers HSH158BPL and HSH159BPL. They were sold in children’s sizes 6 months through size 12.  They consist of a long-sleeve shirt with collar and buttons paired with matching full-length pants with elastic waistband.  Pajama set style HSH158BPL is blue with a white snowflake pattern. Pajama set style HSH159BPL is red and white gingham checkered pattern. The style number is printed on a white label located on the garment’s hangtag. There are two tags sewn into the neckline. “VIVE LA FȆTE” is printed on the top tag. The garment size and fiber content with the phrases “CARE ON REVERSE” and “MADE IN EL SALVADOR” are printed on the bottom tag.

Incidents/Injuries

None reported

Remedy

Consumers should immediately stop using the pajamas and contact Vive La Fete for instructions on how to receive a full refund.

http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2013/Vive-La-Fete-Recalls-Childrens-Pajamas/

Nourison Recalls Rugs Due to Fire Hazard; Sold Exclusively at Home Depot

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product because the product could cause personal injuries or death due to product liability. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Name of product:

Area Rugs

Hazard:

The rugs fail to meet federal flammability standards, posing a fire hazard to consumers.

Consumer Contact:

Nourison at (800) 223-1110 ext. 2358 from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or online at www.nourison.com, then click on Recall Information at the bottom of the page for more information.

Description

This recall involves Nourison-branded I-CANDI collection polyester shag rugs. They were sold in one color, denim, consisting of a mix of dark blue, light blue and grey shades. The rugs measure 5-by 7-feet and 7-feet 6-inches by 9-feet 6-inches. “ICANDI COLLECTION” and “Nourison” are printed in black on a label affixed to the back of the rug.

Incidents/Injuries

None reported.

Remedy

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled rugs and contact Nourison for instructions on how to return the rug for a full refund or replacement, including shipping.

Sold exclusively at

The Home Depot stores in the following regions: Washington D.C.; San Diego, Calif.; San Francisco, Calif.; Las Vegas, Nev. and Houston, Texas in September 2012 for between $179 and $389.

Source:  http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2013/Nourison-Recalls-Rugs/

Optimus Recalls Portable Electric Heaters Due to Fire Hazard

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product because the product could cause personal injuries or death due to product liability. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Name of product:

Portable Infrared Radiant Quartz Electric Space Heaters

Hazard:

The heater design can fail to prevent ignition of nearby combustible materials that come in contact with the unit, posing a fire hazard to the consumer.

Consumer Contact:

Optimus Enterprise Inc. toll-free at (888) 672-5832 from 10 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m. PT Monday through Friday, or online at www.optimusent.com and click on “recall” for more information. Consumers can also email the firm at return.optimus@gmail.com.

Description

This recall involves two models of Optimus Infrared Quartz Radiant heaters with model numbers H-5210, produced in 2011 and H-5211, produced in 2012. The model number and the year of production appear on a label on the back of the heater. The recalled heaters are white and are approximately 12-inches wide by 13-inches tall by 6-inches deep. “Optimus” is printed on the top left of the heater. The control knob is located on the top right side of the heater.

Incidents/Injuries

None reported.

Remedy

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled heaters and contact Optimus to request a free replacement heater. Consumers have the option of a comparable ceramic heater or new model quartz radiant heater, model H-5510, which will be available after August 2013.

Sold at

Best Buy Market Place, Family Dollar, Heartland, Northern Tool,  Rite Aid and other stores nationwide and online at Amazon.com, ebay.com and Walmart.com from October 2011 through December 2012 for between $25 and $30.

Source:  http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2013/Optimus-Recalls-Portable-Electric-Heaters/

Remedies In Iowa Mechanic’s Lien Cases

I discussed the basics of Iowa’s mechanic’s lien law in an earlier post.  So let’s say that you, the contractor or homeowner, are now involved in a mechanic’s lien case.  How will the judge decide whether the contractor is entitled to any money?

The general rule is that in order to enforce a mechanic’s lien, the work must be “substantially performed” by the contractor.   A technical, exact, and perfect performance is not necessary in an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien.  “Substantial performance” permits only such omissions or deviations from the contract as are inadvertent or unintentional, are not due to bad faith, do not impair the structure as a whole, and are remediable without doing material damage to other parts of the building in tearing down and reconstructing.

A contractor that substantially performs under a building or construction contract is entitled to recover the contract price minus the cost of repairing the defects or completing the unfinished part of the work so as to bring the construction up to the level required by the contract.  A contractor that fails to substantially perform under a construction contract still has a right to be paid, but the payment may be much less than the contract called for or the contractor may even end up owing the homeowner money.

Mechanic’s lien cases often devolve into nothing more than an exercise in arithmetic for the judge.  Using the basic principles summarized above, the judge starts by determining whether the contractor has “substantially completed” the work.  If the contractor has substantially completed the work, the judge next considers the contract price for the work and subtracts any amounts the judge believes are appropriate for the cost of repairing or completing the contractor’s work.  The result is the amount that the contractor wins.  It is impossible for a contractor to not recover at least some money as long as it has substantially performed under the contract.

If the contractor has not “substantially completed” the work, the judge might also consider other damages to the homeowner, in addition to the costs of completing or remedying the contractor’s work, as part of the calculation and deduct those extra items of damages from the contract price too.  In theory, a contractor’s lack of substantial performance can cause the contractor to receive little or nothing under the contract, depending on how large the judge’s deductions become.  In fact, if the homeowner’s damages exceed the amount owed the contractor, as determined by the judge, then the contractor will get nothing and will actually owe the homeowner the difference between the homeowner’s damages and the lesser amount that the judge has decided to award the contractor.

Toro Recalls Zero Turn Riding Mowers Due to Fire Hazard

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product because the product could cause personal injuries or death due to product liability. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Name of product:

Toro® Z Master® Riding Mowers

Hazard:

The idler pulley can rub against the mower’s fuel tank, posing a fire hazard.

Consumer Contact:

Toro; toll-free at (855) 493-0090, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, or online at www.toro.com and click on Product Recall Information on the bottom right-hand side of the page for more information.

Description

This recall involves 2012 and 2013 Toro Z Master Commercial 2000 Series ZRT riding mowers. The mowers are red and black. “Toro” and “2000 Series” are printed on the side and “Z Master Commercial” on the front of the mowers. When viewed from the operator’s seat, the model and serial numbers are on a metal plate located at the front of the mower, below the seat, on the right-hand side. The following models and corresponding serial numbers are included in this recall: model number 74141 with serial numbers ranging from 312000101 to 312000784 and 313000101 to 313000364; model number 74143 with serial numbers ranging from 312000101 to 312000881 and 313000101 to 313000432; and model number 74145 with serial numbers ranging from 312000101 to 312001178 and 313000101 to 313000443.

Incidents/Injuries

Toro has received six reports of incidents. No injuries have been reported.

Remedy

Consumers should stop using the recalled mowers immediately and contact a Toro dealer to schedule a free repair and/or to check if the repair has already been made to the mower. Toro has contacted registered owners of the recalled mowers.

Sold at

Toro dealers nationwide from January 2012 through April 2013 for between $7,700 and $8,700.

Manufacturer

The Toro Co., of Bloomington, Minn.

Manufactured in

United States

Source:  http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2013/Toro-Recalls-Zero-Turn-Riding-Mowers/

Can You Be Defamed At Work By Your Managers Or Co-Workers?

Defamation consists of false written or oral statements that tend to injure a person’s reputation and good name.  But how does that apply to managers or co-workers in the employment context?  Can comments by a manager or co-worker lead to liability for defamation or some sort of business practices issue?  The Iowa Supreme Court has never answered that question, but the Iowa Court of Appeals did recently in Newell v. JDS Holdings.

The Newell court decided that inter-corporate communications can, in limited circumstances, form the basis for a defamation claim.  The court thought that a defamatory statement made to one’s employer can harm one’s business reputation with the employer, whether the defamer is a co-worker or is instead removed from the employment relationship.  But the Newell court also ruled that inter-office communications are entitled to a limited privilege under certain circumstances, a privilege that, if applicable, protects the co-worker or manager from liability for defamation.

Under Newell, there’s now a two-stage inquiry under Iowa law in inter-corporate defamation cases.  First, is the statement entitled to protection under the limited privilege?  Second, if the statement is entitled to the limited privilege, has the defendant somehow abused the privilege and forfeited the immunity that the privilege would otherwise provide?

The limited privilege applies to employment communications if (1) the statement was made in good faith (2) the statement was on any subject matter in which the person communicating has an interest to uphold or with reference to which the person had a duty to speak (3) the scope of the statement was limited to the identified interest, and (4) the statement was made on a proper occasion, in a proper manner, and to proper parties only.  Inter-corporate statements that do not satisfy each of those elements do not received privileged status.

Even if an inter-corporate statement does receive protection from the limited privilege, that protection can be lost if the privilege is abused.  To defeat the privilege, a plaintiff must prove the defendant acted with knowing or reckless disregard of the truth of the statement.  If that cannot be proved, then the limited privilege applies and the manager or co-worker is immune from liability.  Of course, if the statement complained about is not even entitled to the limited privilege, then standard defamation rules apply and there is no possible immunity from liability.

MTD Products Recalls Cub Cadet Commercial Lawn Mowers Due to Risk of Fire (Recall Alert)

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product because the product could cause personal injuries or death due to product liability. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Name of product:

Cub Cadet 2011 Commercial Zero Turn Mowers

Hazard:

Fuel can leak from the vent valve grommet on top of the fuel tank during operation, posing a risk of fire.

Consumer Contact:

Cub Cadet; toll-free at (888) 848-6038, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET Saturday, or online at http://www.cubcadet.com and click on “Product Recalls” for more information.

Units

About 2,100

Description

This recall involves eight 2011 model Cub Cadet commercial zero turn lawn mowers. Models included in the recall are: M54-KH, M60-KH, M60-KW, M72-KW, S6031-KW, S7237-KW, TANK L48 and TANK L60.  Mowers included in the recall were manufactured between January 2011 and December 2011. A label located on the frame under the foot rest lists the model number and the month and year date of manufacture (DOM).

Incidents/Injuries

Cub Cadet has received 106 reports of fuel leaking or seeping from the top of the tank, including one report of a fire. No injuries have been reported.

Remedy

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled mowers and contact an authorized Cub Cadet service dealer for a free repair. Cub Cadet is contacting its customers directly.

Sold at

Independent Cub Cadet dealers nationwide from January 2011 through January 2013 for between $7,700 and $18,700.

Manufacturer

MTD Products Inc, of Cleveland, Ohio

Manufactured in

United States