# data[].attributes.headline
2.How does it fit or match the legal definition (the elements) of negligence, strict liability, or intentional harm?

# data[].attributes.subject
2.How does it fit or match the legal definition (the elements) of negligence, strict liability, or intentional harm?

# data[].attributes.body
It matches the definition of negligence because it shows how someone was injured by either someone or something in a non intentionally way. If it were something then it would be the product that the company had that would get them sued. If it were a person then they would get sued.

# data[].attributes.headline
4.Who is the defendant, plaintiff? What did they do? When and where was your case filed?

# data[].attributes.subject
4.Who is the defendant, plaintiff? What did they do? When and where was your case filed?

# data[].attributes.body
The plaintiff here is Francisco Garcia, he had serious injuries from lifting weights on an exercise ball and it popped causing serious injury. The defendant here is M-F Athletic Company and Ball Dynamics International, A ball distributor provided a faulty product. During the month of October in 2009

# data[].attributes.headline
3.Describe what happened in your tort? What are important events?

# data[].attributes.subject
3.Describe what happened in your tort? What are important events?

# data[].attributes.body
Garcia was balancing the an exercise ball and lifting weights at the same time, both being 90 lbs. Then suddenly having the ball burst from underneath him, causing serious injuries including a fractured forearm.

# data[].attributes.headline
5.Where there any damages awarded in this case?Do you think the ruling was fair?

# data[].attributes.subject
5.Where there any damages awarded in this case?Do you think the ruling was fair?

# data[].attributes.body
The damages awarded in this case were $4,000,000.00 to Francisco Garcia.As a result of his injuries, Garcia missed four months of basketball in the first year of a five-year, $29.6 million contract extension. Due to an aggravation of the forearm injury, Garcia missed an additional two games this March. He was awarded this much money because of how much he missed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At The Brod Law Firm, our Sacramento injury lawyer believes that every client deserves his full attention, the benefit of his legal knowledge, and the advantage of the years of experience his whole legal team has representing victims in Northern California's civil courts. When we work on product liability suits, we focus on linking the injury to the defective product and proving the extent of damages suffered as a result. Our job, and our dedication, is the same whether the client is a household name or known only in his/her own household. Still, the attention drawn to a celebrity case can help remind everyone that the law does provide remedies for those injured by a faulty product in California.

Garcia and Kings Settle Product Liability Claim Over Defective Exercise Ball
As reported in The Sacramento Bee, the Sacramento Kings and Francisco Garcia, who has played for the team since being chosen as a first-round draft pick in 2005, recently settled product liability claims stemming from an accident tied to an exercise ball. On October 9, 2009, Garcia was working out and lifting weights while he balanced on a seventy-five centimeter Gymnic exercise ball. The ball unexpectedly burst, dropping the athlete forcibly to the floor while he continued to hold a ninety pound weight in each hand. According to Garcia's complaint, he incurred serious injuries including a fracture to the right forearm. As a result of his injuries, Garcia missed four months of basketball in the first year of a five-year, $29.6 million contract extension. Due to an aggravation of the forearm injury, Garcia missed an additional two games this March. According to a study commissioned by the plaintiffs, the company warranted that the exercise ball was blast-resistant and able to withstand 600 pounds, but tests showed a similar ball burst with under only 400 pounds of weight.

Both the Kings and Garcia filed suit against Ledraplastic S.p.a., an Italian company. Garcia's complaint sought an unspecified amount of compensation including damages for physical pain, mental suffering, and loss of future earnings. The Kings claimed a breach of manufacturer's warranty and sought more than $4 million that the team was required to pay Garcia while he was sidelined due to the injury. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, the financial terms will be kept secret but the company agreed to send a letter to all their distributors that the product should only be used with body weight and never with weights. The letter will also advise that the distributors forward the warning letter to their customers.

California Product Liability Claims
At heart, the claims in Garcia's lawsuit fall under products liability principles. California courts use a strict liability rule in products liability cases. The plaintiff in these cases does not need to prove that the defendant acted negligently. Instead, the plaintiff only needs to prove: 1) The product was not safe; 2) The plaintiff was injured; and 3) The product caused the injury. This rule recognizes how difficult it would be to prove that the plaintiff knew or should have known the product was dangerous or was otherwise negligent in manufacturing or selling the item.

California products liability claims usually revolve around one of three general theories of the case. These theories are: 1) Design defect (where the product's design involves inherent dangers even though a safer alternative exists); 2) Manufacturing defect (where the design was generally safe but the item failed to adhere to the plan resulting in a dangerous item); and 3) Warning/Instructional defect (where a manufacturer or seller failed to provide a warning regarding a known danger). Notably, these theories do require proving both danger and a safer alternative but they do not require proving anything about the defendant's intention or knowledge.

Our Firm, Our Promise
Greg Brod is an experienced Sacramento products liability attorney. Along with his team, he uses this knowledge to help every client recover compensation. Every case and every client gets the very best legal service because every client is important to us, whether or not their names are on the roster at Sleep Train Arena.

See Related Blog Posts:
Meningitis Outbreak Linked to Contaminated Drugs
Product Liability Law: Protecting the Public

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Products Liability Law: From Basketball Stars to Friends and Family

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At The Brod Law Firm, our Sacramento injury lawyer believes that every client deserves his full attention, the benefit of his legal knowledge, and the advantage of the years of experience his whole legal team has representing victims in Northern California's civil courts.

# data[].attributes.headline
1.What type of tort does your case fall under?

# data[].attributes.subject
1.What type of tort does your case fall under?

# data[].attributes.body
This is a negligence case. This is a negligence case because someone was injured by someone or something.Also because the harm was not intentional. The definition of negligence was negligence involves harm caused by carelessness, not intentional harm.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Sacramento Kings and NBA player Francisco Garcia have settled their product liability lawsuit against exercise ball manufacturer Ledraplastic.

Three years ago, Garcia was balancing on an exercise ball and lifting weights at the same time. Garcia claims he had 90-pound weights in each hand when the ball suddenly burst. As a result, Garcia says that he fell forcibly to the ground and suffered serious injuries including a fractured forearm, reports The Sacramento Bee.

At the time, Garcia had just signed a five-year contract extension with the Kings worth almost $30 million. He had to miss a good portion of the initial season of the contract and suffered lingering injuries throughout.

Garcia and the Kings sued for a breach of the manufacturer's warranty. They claimed that the Ledraplastic marketed the ball as being able to withstand 600 pounds and being "burst resistant." Yet, they claimed that Garcia burst the ball while carrying only 180 pounds of weights. During testing, Garcia's attorney was reportedly able to recreate the ball bursting with 400 pounds on it.

Generally, a manufacturer of a product will be liable for any injuries if the product is not made as advertised. Manufacturers simply can't throw around words like "burst resistant" or being able to withstand a specified amount of weight if their products cannot in fact do so. And if someone is injured because of the defective product, the manufacturer typically has to pay.

The terms of the settlement in the exercise ball case is private, but the Kings had sought reimbursement for the salary they paid Garcia. Garcia had also sought damages for pain and suffering as well as loss in future earning capacity. As NBA players get paid a lot, the amount that Ledraplastic paid to resolve the lawsuit is likely significant.

In addition, Ledraplastic is also required to include a warning to all purchasers of the ball not to use it while lifting free weights.

Related Resources:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NBA Star Francisco Garcia Settles Exercise Ball Lawsuit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Sacramento Kings and NBA player Francisco Garcia have settled their product liability lawsuit against exercise ball manufacturer Ledraplastic. Three years ago, Garcia was balancing on an exercise ball and lifting weights at the same time. Garcia claims he had...