The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark search twitter facebook feed linkedin instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close
Skip to main content

In September 2017, six plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against Tristar products concerning their power pressure cookers. The plaintiffs all claim that after using the products as directed, they suffered serious burn injuries. They seek damages in excess of $75,000.

The case is pending in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.

Six Plaintiffs Suffer from Substantial Burn Injuries

According to the complaint, the first plaintiff, an Arkansas man, was given the cooker as a gift around December 2016. On July 9, 2017, he used it for cooking. The manufacturer advertised the product as having a built-in safety feature that would prevent opening while under pressure, but the plaintiff alleges that he rotated and opened the lid nonetheless, causing serious and substantial burn injuries to him.

The second man, a resident of South Carolina, received his cooker from his wife in June 2016. He used it on January 18, 2017, and suffered similar injuries. He opened the lid while the cooker was still under pressure and the scalding hot contents were forcefully ejected from the cooker onto his body.

The third plaintiff, a woman from Texas, used her pressure cooker around August 20, 2017. She was also able to open the lid while there was still pressure in the pot and suffered from severe burns. The other three plaintiffs reside in California, Michigan, and Minnesota, and all suffered from serious burn injuries after opening the cooker when the safety features were supposed to prevent them from doing so.

Plaintiffs Claim Tristar Pressure Cooker Defective

The plaintiffs claim that the Tristar Power Pressure Cooker is defective, as it was supposed to have built-in safety features, including a “lid safety device,” that was designed to prevent the unit from building pressure if the lid wasn’t closed correctly, as well as to prevent it from being opened until all the pressure was released. Yet this feature didn’t work as advertised when these six plaintiffs used the cookers.

The plaintiffs add that despite the company’s statements about its safety features, “the lid of the pressure cooker is removable with built-up pressure, heat, and steam still inside the unit. When the lid is removed under such circumstances, the pressure trapped within the unit causes the scalding hot contents to be projected from the unit and into the surrounding area, including onto the unsuspecting customers, their families, and other bystanders.”

Indeed, the Tristar pressure cooker owner’s manual states that the lid safety device “prevents pressure build-up if the lid is not closed properly and prevents the lid from opening until all pressure is released.”

The plaintiffs claim the defendants should have known that their product wouldn’t work as advertised or should have warned consumers about the possibility of the lid opening while the cooker was still under pressure.

The plaintiffs bring counts of strict liability, negligence, design defect, failure to warn, breach of warranties, negligent misrepresentation, and fraudulent concealment. They seek both compensatory and punitive damages.

Comments are closed.

Of Interest