Quantcast

Maker of squat band exercise machine says it's not liable for woman's eye injuries

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Sunday, November 24, 2024

Maker of squat band exercise machine says it's not liable for woman's eye injuries

Federal Court
Thesquatmagic

The Squat Magic

PHILADELPHIA – The manufacturer and distributor of a squat band exercise machine which allegedly malfunctioned and blinded a woman who used the device denies liability for the subject incident.

Janiece Eisenhart of York first filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on April 23 against HSNi, LLC (c/o Corporation Service Company) of Harrisburg and Allstar Marketing Group, LLC of Hawthorne, N.Y.

The case was then removed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on May 13.

On Jan. 26, 2018, Eisenhart’s mother purchased for her The Squat Magic, an exercise device designed to provide assistance with squat movements. The device was comprised of a seat, tube components and adjustable bands used to control the resistance associated with the device.

“On Oct. 4, 2018, plaintiff was using the Squat Magic when one of the bands snapped free, striking her in the face. One of the Squat Magic’s plastic discs, which is approximately the size of a quarter, struck plaintiff’s left eye,” the suit stated.

“Plaintiff’s left eye became very painful and swollen upon being struck by the plastic disc, and she experienced vision loss. Plaintiff immediately presented to Memorial Hospital in York, Pennsylvania, where she was diagnosed with a concussion, and an examination revealed multiple linear corneal abrasions on her left eye. Plaintiff was subsequently diagnosed with traumatic hyphema, retinal hemorrhage, and retinal tears in her left eye.”

After undergoing surgical repair for the retinal tears in her left eye, the plaintiff says she still suffers from ongoing headaches, vision loss, vision disturbances and pain in her left eye.

UPDATE

However, the defendants filed an answer to the complaint on July 8, denying the plaintiff’s claims in their entirety and countering with a quartet of affirmative defenses.

“The claims of the plaintiff are barred and/or limited by the applicable provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act and the contributory negligence of the plaintiff, and the plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a cause of action by which relief may be granted. Plaintiff’s claims may be barred by the applicable period of the statute of limitations and the plaintiff has failed to mitigate her damages,” according to the defendants’ answer.

For multiple counts of strict liability and negligence against both defendants, the plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of $50,000, together with costs and interest thereon as allowed by law.

The plaintiff is represented by Jaime D. Jackson of Atlee Hall, in Lancaster.

The defendants are represented by Warren F. Sperling of Bennett Bricklin & Saltzburg, in Philadelphia.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-02268

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 200200353

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com

More News