Nintendo Sued for $236K over Faulty DS Adapter
Nintendo Sued for $236K over Faulty DS Adapter
December 19, 2008
An insurance company has sued Nintendo for $236,304, alleging that a faulty Nintendo DS AC adapter ignited a January, 2007 fire at a residence in Kentucky.
According to the complaint, the home owner was compensated for "substantial" fire damage by the Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company. Liberty Mutual is attempting to recover its costs from Nintendo. In addition to the $236K, the company seeks interest and court costs.
The suit, filed yesterday with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, notes that Nintendo previously conducted a product recall of DS units due to overheating issues. From the complaint:
The [DS] was defective in design, manufacture and/or because it failed to warn consumers as to dangers associated with it... due to defects existing within the Product which caused a risk of overheating and fire, the Product was recalled by Nintendo.
UPDATE: Download the complaint here.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 07/04/09 at 01:18pm
Andrew Eisen: Rodrigo - A fun idea but you might want to fix the typos.
Andrew Eisen: Rodrigo - A fun idea but you might want to fix the typos.
Posted 07/04/09 at 12:57pm
GRIZZAM PRIME: Happy 4th of July!
GRIZZAM PRIME: Happy 4th of July!
Posted 07/04/09 at 12:44pm
Yuuri: Happy Blow Crap Up Day!
Yuuri: Happy Blow Crap Up Day!
Posted 07/04/09 at 11:09am
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: I designed this shirt for Jack debate today: http://i44.tinypic.com/2552t89.jpg
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: I designed this shirt for Jack debate today: http://i44.tinypic.com/2552t89.jpg
Posted 07/04/09 at 11:06am
BearDogg-X: There's a one minute and a half preview of the video game episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! up at http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/home.do
BearDogg-X: There's a one minute and a half preview of the video game episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! up at http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/home.do
Posted 07/04/09 at 10:08am
Arcanagos: Happy 4th all
Arcanagos: Happy 4th all
Posted 07/04/09 at 09:32am
Firebird: Greetings GP community, and HAPPY 4th of JULY!!!
Firebird: Greetings GP community, and HAPPY 4th of JULY!!!
Posted 07/04/09 at 03:48am
Michael Chandra: I missed out on Jack? =(
Michael Chandra: I missed out on Jack? =(
Posted 07/04/09 at 01:52am
Escanor94: hmm, looks like when someone gets banned all their comments are automaticly deleted
Escanor94: hmm, looks like when someone gets banned all their comments are automaticly deleted
Posted 07/03/09 at 11:46pm
Arcanagos: aww, did i miss the JT party? :(
Arcanagos: aww, did i miss the JT party? :(
Posted 07/03/09 at 11:00pm
Leet Gamer Jargon: Where's the recent JT bullcrap? Which comments section has he vomited on? EDIT: Nevermind; it's in the "Radio" thread.
Leet Gamer Jargon: Where's the recent JT bullcrap? Which comments section has he vomited on? EDIT: Nevermind; it's in the "Radio" thread.
Posted 07/03/09 at 09:17pm
BearDogg-X: I wonder what the Metropolitian Moron of Miami said in response to my comment saying that he got a dose of his medicine on the SGC09 Debate thread?
BearDogg-X: I wonder what the Metropolitian Moron of Miami said in response to my comment saying that he got a dose of his medicine on the SGC09 Debate thread?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:51pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: He gets offended with a bunch of flowers.
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: He gets offended with a bunch of flowers.
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:49pm
GoodRobotUs: LOL He takes offence at the fact he might have *chosen* to be crazy?
GoodRobotUs: LOL He takes offence at the fact he might have *chosen* to be crazy?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:47pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: He warned me to get a lawyer after I called him "crazy by his own choice"... that´s libel for him
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: He warned me to get a lawyer after I called him "crazy by his own choice"... that´s libel for him
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:45pm
HilaryDuffGta: "libel" what did he threaten now?
HilaryDuffGta: "libel" what did he threaten now?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:44pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Was fun to be threatened for "libel" again.
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Was fun to be threatened for "libel" again.
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:26pm
HilaryDuffGta: hey so what did i miss??? the usual spam of "crap"
HilaryDuffGta: hey so what did i miss??? the usual spam of "crap"
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:15pm
FlakAttack: Jack ruined his chance to have civil debates with us here. Glad you banned him (again).
FlakAttack: Jack ruined his chance to have civil debates with us here. Glad you banned him (again).
Posted 07/03/09 at 04:04pm
Krono: Unexpected is probably the best word to describe it. Particularly as no decent reason is given.
Krono: Unexpected is probably the best word to describe it. Particularly as no decent reason is given.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Was it a DS or a DS lite?
Does it matter? Now it's deep-fried.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon
It's certainly possible the rule is slightly outdated, but as far as I know, they can't use it. They could try to get it in, judge might allow it.
Regards,
Jason
the recall regarded the DS Lite in Japan, so the case is doomed to failure.
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
If it was recalled, what's the case then. Sad, but the houise owner's chances are not that big.
men's rings | types of diamond rings
The complaint kinda nulls itself out.
if it was recalled, and your still using it, despite it's recall, your using it AT YOUR OWN RISK
That's actually a really good point.
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, the plaintiff's are not allowed to introduce the recall as evidence of liability unless Nintendo denies any and all responsibility for the problem.
The idea is to not use evidence of problems being fixed as evidence of liability because we don't want to discourage companies from fixing problems by allowing evidence of the repairs to be used agaisnt them.
However, if the company totally denies responsibility THEN the evidence comes in to show the company took "ownership of the problem and responsibility for its repair."
However, there is NOTHING in the Federal Rules preventing Nintendo from using the recall as evidence that the consumer was aware of the problem and continued to use the product knowing it was faulty and under recall.
At the least that's going to bring this into the realm of comparative/contributory negligence.
STANDARD DISCLAIMER:
I am a law student, not a lawyer. Nothing in this post should be considered legal advice in any way, shape, or form. This is my opinion as a lay person studying the law, this is not a legal opinion or the opinion of a lawyer.
Sorry, gotta say it, otherwise I could get in trouble.
Yeah, but related stories say that the recall was only for 200,000 units sold in Japan. Does that help the plaintiffs?
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
The rule is pretty explicit, it says evidence of remedial measures is inadmissible. I don't know if there have been any rulings regarding partial remedial methods. I just took my evidence exam the other day, it definitely didn't come up there. But you'll forgive me if I don't feel like digging it up
. Maybe when my brain is working again I'll take a look.
It's certainly possible the rule is slightly outdated, but as far as I know, they can't use it. They could try to get it in, judge might allow it.
What Nintendo could argue is that the U.S. adaptor isn't the same thing, so they had no notice that there was a problem with the U.S. adaptor. That would be an easy argument if Japan uses different plugs (I have no idea if they do).
In that case, the plaintiff's case actually gets harder cause they have to show that Nintendo negligently MANUFACTURED the thing instead of just negligently ignored a known problem. Defect cases are a lot harder to make than just negligent cases because you have to show the manufacturer made the thing in such a shoddy way that they at least SHOULD have been aware it was defective.
If that's the case, then it probably would help the plaintiffs. I believe that the "plaintiff knew or should have known" rule with regard to a recall would only apply to countries that were affected by the recall. A fire inspector or electrician saying that the unit was faulty would also be helpful. Then again, the socket itself could have been at fault, but that's not my field.
"That's not ironic. That's justice."
The outlet could have been outputting too much energy, the user could have damaged it and that could have made it dangerous, and many other things. So they will have a hard time winning this case unless they find something that proves Nintendo made a bad products for one reason or another where they could easily just look at it and tell something is wrong or knew of a problem with it by consumer reports or testing.
I love how some companies have it against the rules for their employees to let people know about problems with their products, but the are to tell the truth at the stand. So they either break the law, their agreement, or plead the 5th.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
One thing you always have to remember is that there is always going to be at least one defective product that reach consumer hands. I found out Nintendo doesn't make the DS adapter.
it also could've been a third-party AC adapter for all we know
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
You know, honestly....I would say haha on them....but....no.
I've had a few gateway power supplies go up in flames and almost start to burn our house down so I somewhat know how it feels to be given a crappy product, and how would they have found out about the recall? Did Nintendo send out an email? Or was it just one of those recall notices at walmart where no one goes?
This may seem strange, but cases like these happens everyday, and Insurance companies do win many times. One of the most common cases involve car companies.
they will have a hard time winning this case unless they find something that proves Nintendo made a bad products for one reason or another where they could easily.