Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2nde# PGINGPZeaPAASEMidcGon:4/8/20223:53PM
`-99-cv-
`-
`j
`-C
`Il Circuit Court
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 1 of 16
`
`
`
`(OD(OnLORDDQPCOPLO?WO?UO?CO?LORKO?LODCOPCOPLODCODOP?GORCOP?(ODCORCORCO?4076D(OnCO?UO?CO?CO?CORLO?>COP?COD“OnOP
`
`IN THE
`
`CIRCUIT COURT
`
`FOR
`
`CARROLL COUNTY
`
`MARYLAND
`
`Case No.: C-06-CV-22-000050
`
`FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
`AND JURY DEMAND
`
`APRIL TAYLOR,Individually and as
`Next Friend and Parent of L.G., and as Personal
`Representative of the Estate of L.G.
`265 E. Main Street, Suite D
`Westminster, Maryland 21157
`
`and
`
`ERIC GIFFI,Individually and as Next Friend
`and Parent of L.G.
`265 E. Main Street, Suite D
`Westminster, Maryland 21157
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`Vv.
`
`FISHER-PRICE,INC.
`636 Girard Ave.
`East Aurora, New York 14052
`
`Serve on:
`The Corporation Trust Incorporated
`351 West Camden Street
`Baltimore, Maryland 21201
`
`and
`
`MATTEL,INC.
`333 Continental Boulevard
`El Segundo, California 90245
`
`Serve on:
`The Corporation Trust Company
`1209 OrangeStreet
`Wilmington, Delaware 19801
`
`Defendants.
`
`FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND JURY DEMAND
`
`Plaintiffs, April Taylor, Individually and as Next Friend and Parentof L.G., and Personal
`
`Representative of the Estate of L.G., a deceased minor and Eric Giffi (“Plaintiffs”), Individually
`
`and as Next Friend and Parent of deceased minor L.G., by and through undersigned counsel
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 2 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 2 of 16
`
`hereby files this First Amended Complaint For Damages and Jury Trial Demand against
`
`Defendants, Fisher Price, Inc, a foreign corporation, and Mattel, Inc., a foreign corporation and
`
`in support hereof, Plaintiffs respectfully aver as follows:
`
`PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
`
`1,
`
`Plaintiff April Taylor is a United States citizen currently residing at 265 E. Main
`
`Street, Suite D, Westminster, Carroll County, Maryland, 21157.
`
`Da
`
`Decedent, L.G., was a minor child and United States citizen and at the time of his
`
`death he resided at 265 E. Main Street, Suite D, Westminster, Carroll County, Maryland, 21157.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Plaintiff April Tayloris the natural parent and nextfriend of Decedent L.G .
`
`Plaintiff April Taylor was appointed Personal Representative of the Estate of L.G.
`
`by Orderof the Register of Wills for Carroll County, Maryland entered on April 1, 2022, and has
`
`received letters of Administration from the Court granting Plaintiff authority over Decedent’s
`
`estate.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff Eric Giffi is a United States citizen currently residing at 265 E. Main
`
`Street, Suite D, Westminster, Carroll County, Maryland, 21157.
`
`Plaintiff Eric Giffi is the natural parent and next friend of Decedent L.G.
`
`At all relevant
`
`times Plaintiffs and Decedent were residents of the State of
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`Maryland.
`
`8.
`
`Decedent L.G. is survived by his mother, Plaintiff April Taylor and his father,
`
`Plaintiff Eric Giffi, both of whom are his next of kin.
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiff April Taylor brings this action on behalf of the next of kin, which are
`
`herself, as mother, and Eric Giffi, as father, pursuant to the Maryland Courts and Judicial
`
`Proceedings Annotated Code §3-904 (2014).
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 3 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 3 of 16
`
`10.
`
`Plaintiffs April Taylor and Eric Giffi conducted a good faith and reasonably
`
`diligent effort to identify, locate, and nameas useplaintiffs all individuals who might qualify as
`
`use plaintiffs.
`
`11.
`
`Defendant Mattel, Inc. (“Mattel”) is a corporation organized under the laws of the
`
`State of Delaware with its principal place of business at 333 Continental Boulevard, El Segundo,
`
`California 90245. Defendant Mattel, Inc. can be served through its registered agent: The
`
`Corporation Trust Company, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`Defendant Mattel is authorized to do and is doing business in Maryland.
`
`Defendant, Fisher-Price, Inc. (“Fisher-Price”) is organized under the laws of the
`
`State of Delaware with its principal place of business at 636 Girard Avenue, East Aurora, New
`
`York 14052 andis a subsidiary of Mattel. Defendant Fisher-Price, Inc. can be served throughits
`registered agent: The Corporation Trust Incorporated, 351 West Camden Street, Baltimore,
`
`Maryland, 21201.
`
`14.
`
`15.
`
`Defendant Fisher-Price is authorized to do andis doing business in Maryland.
`
`All acts complained of herein were done by Defendants ortheir authorized agents,
`
`and if by Defendants’ employees,
`
`in the course and scope of their employment, so that
`
`Defendantsare legally responsible for their agents’ or employees’ acts.
`
`VENUE AND JURISDICTION.
`
`16.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over Defendants pursuant to MD. Code Ann. Cts. &
`
`Jud. Proc. § 6-102 and § 6-103(b). Defendants regularly conduct and transact business in Carroll
`
`County, Maryland.
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 4 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 4 of 16
`
`17.
`
`Venueis proper in Carroll County pursuant to MD. Code Ann.Cts. & Jud. Proc. §
`
`6-202(8) because the cause of action arose in Carroll County where Plaintiffs and the decedent
`
`were injured.
`
`18.
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`Plaintiffs reallege the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 18.
`
`The Rock ‘n Playis an inclined sleep product marketed for infant overnightsleep.
`
`The Rock ‘n Play wasfirst introducedto the U. S. market by Fisher-Price and
`
`Mattel in 2009.
`
`21.
`
`22.
`
`The Rock ‘n Play includes a folding frame with a fabric hammock.
`
`The Rock ‘n Play was advertised and marketed as safe for infant sleeping,
`
`including overnightsleep.
`
`23.
`
`The American Academy of Pediatrics (“AAP”) and major consumer groups
`
`repeatedly issued warnings about the serious dangersof inclinedsleepers.
`
`24.
`
`Canada and Australia both prohibited to sale of the Rock ‘n Play over concerns
`
`about the dangers of allowing infants to sleep in an inclined position.
`
`25.
`
`At least 94 deaths have occurred in babies using the Rock ‘n Play sleeper since
`
`the introduction of the sleeper in 2009.
`
`26.|Upwards of 700 injuries have been reported due to the use of inclined sleepers,
`
`including the Rock ‘n Play sleeper.
`
`the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) and
`On April 5, 2019,
`27.
`Fisher-Price issued a statement advising the public that ten infant deaths have occurred while
`
`using the Rock‘n Play since 2015 and recommending that the infant sleeper not be used once the
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 5 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 5 of 16
`
`infant has reached three monthsof ageor as soon as the infant exhibits rollover capabilities.'
`
`28.
`
`On April 5, 2019, Mattel issued a press release, which assured the public that
`
`“(t]he Rock n’ Play Sleeper meets all applicable safety standards,
`
`including those of the
`
`international standards organization, known as ASTM International, and is certified by the
`
`Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA).”
`
`29.
`
`On April 5, 2019, Chuck Scothon, general manager at Fisher-Price issued a
`
`statement about
`
`the Rock ‘n Play Sleeper and told the public that
`
`the sleeper meets all
`
`“applicable safety standards.”
`
`30.
`
`On April 8, 2019, Consumer Reports published anarticle entitled, Fisher-Price
`
`Rock ‘n Play Sleeper Should Be Recalled, Consumer Reports Says‘. The article outlines an
`
`investigation into the safety of the Rock ‘n Play Sleeper which found that Fisher-Price was aware
`
`of at least 32 deaths since 2009 involving the Rock ‘n Play Sleeper. Despite the number of
`
`injuries and deaths with the Rock ‘n Play Sleeper, the investigation found that the Rock ‘n Play
`
`Sleeper had not been recalled. Consumer Reports safety experts supported a recall and
`
`recommended that all users of the Rock ‘n Play Sleeper immediately stop using it for routine
`
`sleep.
`
`
`
`
`
`NewsroomNeaws-Releases/2019/CPSC-ALERT-CPSC-and-Fisher-Price- Warn-Consumers-
`
`uy-Due-lo-Reports-o (-Death-When-Infants-Roll-Over-in-the-Product(last visited
`
`February 9, 2021).
`s/finvestors.malteLcony news-releases‘new s-release-details/media-statement-us-consumer-produet-safely-
`
`r (last visited February 9, 2021).
`
`ww.cnn.com/2019/04/05¢healthfisher-price-rock-n-play-sleeper-warning/index.html (last visited February
`
` hitps:/www.consumerreports.org’recalls fisher-price-rock-n-play-sleeper-should-be-recalled-consumer-reporis:
`says’ (last visited February 9, 2021).
`§ hitps:/Awway.consumerreports.ore/recallsTsher- prive-rock-n-play-sleeper-should-be-recalled-consumer-reports-
`says. (last visited February 9, 2021).
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 6 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 6 of 16
`
`31.
`
`OnApril 9, 2019, the AAP issueda press release calling on the CPSC andFisher-
`
`Price to issue a recall on the Rock ‘n Play Sleeper and urged parents to stop using the product
`
`immediately.°
`
`32.
`
`Finally, on April 12, 2019, Fisher-Price issued a recall on the Rock ‘n Play
`
`Sleepers. Thetitle of the recall is Fisher-Price Recalls Rock ‘n Play Sleepers Due to Reports of
`
`Deaths”.’ Therecall indicated that 4.7 million unit s had been sold.® Therecall further advised:
`
`Infant fatalities have occurred in Rock ‘n Play Sleepers, after the infants
`rolled from their back to their stomach or side while unrestrained, or under
`other circumstances.”
`
`33.
`
`On February 9, 2019; L.G.’s mother placed L.G.
`
`in the Rock n’ Play infant
`
`sleeper after feeding.
`
`34.
`
`35.
`
`On February 9, 2019, L.G. was a four month old infant.
`
`Plaintiff April Taylor checked on L.G. and discovered L.G. unresponsive in the
`
`Rock ‘n Play and cold to the touch.
`
`36.
`
`37.
`
` At11:22 a.m., L.G. was pronounced dead by hospital personnel.
`
`As aresult of defects in the Rock ‘nPlay, L.G. suffered fatal injuries and died on
`
`February 9, 2019.
`
`COUNT I - STRICT PRODUCT LIABILITY
`
`Plaintiffs reallege the allegations of paragraphs | through 37.
`
`Defendants designed, manufactured,
`
`tested,
`
`inspected, warranted, marketed,
`
`38.
`
`39,
`
`distributed and sold the subject Rock ‘n Play.
`
`
`
`8 Id.
`9 Id.
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 7 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 7 of 16
`
`40.
`
`Defendants designed, manufactured,
`
`tested,
`
`inspected, warranted, marketed,
`
`distributed and sold the subject Rock ‘n Play and/or its componentparts.
`
`41.
`
`The Defendant’s Rock ‘n Play was in the same or substantially similar condition
`
`as whenit left the possession of Defendants and was expectedto and did reach Plaintiffs without
`
`substantial change in the condition. Defendant placed the Rock ‘n Play into the stream of
`
`commerce.
`
`42.
`
`43.
`
`The Plaintiffs did not misuse or materially alter the Rock ‘n Play.
`
`The Rock ‘n Play did not perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would have
`
`expected when used in a reasonably foreseeable way.
`
`44.
`
`At
`
`the time of L.G.’s death,
`
`the subject Rock ‘n Play was defective and
`
`unreasonably dangerous and unfit for its intended and foreseeable uses and purposes because of
`
`its design, manufacture, testing, inspection, warranty, marketing, and/or warning, and hence
`
`suffered from design, manufacture, marketing and/or warning defects.
`
`45.
`
`Asa direct and proximate result of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play, the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct, the Decedent, L.G. sustained severe and
`
`extensive personal injuries that resulted in his death.
`
`46.
`
`Asa direct and proximate result of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play,
`
`the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct,
`
`the Decedent, L.G. suffered a loss of
`
`earning capacity, both past, present and future, for all of which damagesare claimed.
`
`47.
`
`Asa direct and proximate result of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play, the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct, the Plaintiffs suffered injuries and seek
`
`damages for the fair monetary value of Decedent, L.G.’s life, including, but not limited to,
`
`compensation for the loss of the reasonably expected income, consortium,services, protection,
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 8 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 8 of 16
`
`care, assistance,
`
`society, companionship, attention, comfort,
`
`support,
`
`training, guidance,
`
`education, counsel, and advice of Decedent, L.G. Plaintiffs also seek damages for mental
`
`anguish, emotional pain and suffering, and in particularly for Plaintiff, April Taylor,
`
`those
`
`damages from witnessing her child dead and/or dying in the Rock ‘n Play. Plaintiffs further seek
`
`recovery for all medical expenses, the reasonable funeral and burial expenses of Decedent, L.G.,
`
`and non-pecuniary damagesavailable, and any andall other availablerelief.
`
`48.
`
` L.G.’s injuries and death occurred as a direct and proximate cause of the defects
`
`in the subject Rock ‘n Play.
`
`COUNTII —- NEGLIGENCE
`
`Plaintiffs reallege the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 47.
`
`Defendants have a duty of reasonable care to design, manufacture, test, inspect,
`
`49.
`
`50.
`
`market, warn about, distribute, repair, maintain, prepare, install and/or sell the Rock ‘n Play that
`
`is reasonably safe for its intended use by consumers such as Plaintiffs and Decedent.
`
`51.
`
`Defendant failed to exercise ordinary care in the manufacturer, design, testing,
`
`inspection, marketing, warnings, distribution,
`
`repair, maintenance, preparation,
`
`installation
`
`and/orselling of the Rock ‘n Play in that Defendants knew or should have known that the Rock
`
`‘n Play created a high risk of unreasonable harm to Decedentandotherslike him.
`
`52.
`
`Defendants negligently designed, manufactured,
`
`tested,
`
`inspected, marketed,
`
`warned about, distributed, repaired, maintained, prepared, installed and/or sold the subject Rock
`
`‘n Play.
`
`53.
`
`Defendants negligently failed to timely recall the product despite knowledge ofits
`
`defective and unreasonably dangerous condition.
`
`54.
`
`Defendants negligently failed to warn the buyers including the Plaintiffs regarding
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 9 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 9 of 16
`
`the risks and dangers associated with this product.
`
`55.
`
` Asadirect and proximate result of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play, the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct, the Decedent, L.G. sustained severe and
`
`extensive personalinjuries that resulted in his death.
`
`56.
`
`As a direct and proximate result of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play, the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct, the Decedent, L.G. suffered a loss of
`
`earnings capacity, both past, present and future, for all of which damagesare claimed.
`
`57.
`
`Asa direct and proximate result of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play, the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct, the Plaintiffs suffered injuries and seek
`
`damages for the fair monetary value of Decedent, L.G.’s life, including, but not limited to,
`
`compensation for the loss of the reasonably expected income, consortium, services, protection,
`
`care, assistance,
`
`society, companionship, attention, comfort,
`
`support,
`
`training, guidance,
`
`education, counsel, and advice of Decedent, L.G. Plaintiffs also seek damages for mental
`
`anguish, emotional pain and suffering, and in particularly for Plaintiff, April Taylor,
`
`those
`
`damages from witnessing her child dead and/or dying in the Rock ‘n Play.Plaintiffs further seek
`
`recovery for all medical expenses, the reasonable funeral and burial expenses of Decedent, L.G.,
`
`and non-pecuniary damagesavailable, and any and all other available relief.
`
`58.
`
`The injuries and death of L.G. was a direct and proximateresult of the negligence
`
`asserted above and the proximate cause of damagesto the Plaintiffs and decedent.
`
`COUNTIII - BREACH OF EXPRESS AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES
`
`59.
`
`60.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege the allegations of Paragraphs | through 56.
`
`That prior to and at all times herein mentioned, the Defendants expressly and
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 10 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 10 of 16
`
`impliedly warranted that the Rock ‘n Play was properly designed and manufactured, was of
`
`merchantable quality, was reasonably fit for the purposes for which it was intendedto be used,
`
`and that it was safe for said use.
`
`61.
`
`That the Rock ‘n Play was defective, unreasonably dangerous, not fit for the
`
`purposes for which it was intended and did not conform to the expressed or implied warranties of
`
`the Defendants.
`
`62.
`
`Members of the consuming public such as Plaintiffs and Decedent were the
`
`intended third-party beneficiaries of the warranty.
`
`63.
`Plaintiffs relied on the express and implied warranties when they purchased the
`Rock ‘n Play and utilized the Rock ‘n Play and Plaintiffs had a reasonable expectation that it
`
`would conform to the express and implied warranties of Defendants.
`
`64.
`
`Asa direct and proximateresult of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play, the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct, the Decedent, L.G. sustained severe and
`
`extensive personalinjuries that resulted in his death.
`
`65.
`
`Asa direct and proximateresult of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play, the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct, the Decedent, L.G. suffered a loss of
`
`earning capacity, both past, present and future, for all of which damagesare claimed.
`
`66.
`
`Asa direct and proximateresult of the defective condition of the subject Rock ‘n
`
`Play, the Rock ‘n Play and the Defendants’ conduct, the Plaintiffs suffered injuries and seek
`
`damages for the fair monetary value of Decedent, L.G.’s life, including, but not limited to,
`
`compensation for the loss of the reasonably expected income, consortium, services, protection,
`
`care, assistance,
`
`society, companionship, attention, comfort,
`
`support,
`
`training, guidance,
`
`education, counsel, and advice of Decedent, L.G. Plaintiffs also seek damages for mental
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 11 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 11 of 16
`
`anguish, emotional pain and suffering, and in particularly for Plaintiff, April Taylor,
`
`those
`
`damages from witnessing her child dead and/or dying in the Rock ‘n Play. Plaintiffs further seek
`
`recovery for all medical expenses, the reasonable funeral and burial expenses of Decedent, L.G.,
`
`and non-pecuniary damages available, and any andall other availablerelief.
`
`67.
`
`That the Rock ‘n Play breached the aforesaid implied and expressed warranties,
`
`all of which proximately causedinjuries to and the death of the Decedent L.G.
`
`68.
`
`The injuries and death of L.G. wasa direct and proximate result of the breach of
`
`express and implied warranties and the proximate cause of damages to the Plaintiffs and
`
`decedent.
`
`66.
`
`67.
`
`COUNTIV - LOSS OF CONSORTIUM
`
`Plaintiffs reallege the allegations of Paragraphs | through 65.
`
`The Plaintiffs, April Taylor and Eric Giffi, were at all times material hereto, and
`
`now, husband andwife.
`
`68.
`
`Defendants’ wrongful and negligent acts proximately severed the Plaintiffs’
`
`parent and child relationship with Decedent L.G.
`
`68.
`
`Plaintiffs suffered, and will continueto suffer, mental anguish, emotional pain and
`
`suffering, and a loss of society, companionship, affection, assistance, comfort, protection, care,
`
`advice, counsel, and sexual relations, individually resulting from the loss of their parent and
`
`child relationship.
`
`COUNT V - WRONGFUL DEATH ACT
`
`Plaintiffs reallege the allegations of Paragraphs | through 68.
`
`Plaintiffs, collectively, for the benefit of all wrongful death beneficiaries, sue
`
`69.
`
`70.
`
`pursuant to the Wrongful Death Act, Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-904 et seq., and seek
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 12 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 12 of 16
`
`full value of Decedent, LG.’s life.
`
`71.
`
`The conduct described herein was caused by the Defendants who negligently
`
`designed, manufactured,
`
`tested,
`
`inspected, marketed, warned about, distributed,
`
`repaired,
`
`maintained, prepared,installed and/orsold the subject Rock ‘n Play.
`
`72.
`
`The conduct described herein was caused by the Defendants who negligently
`
`failed to timely recall the product despite knowledgeofits defective and unreasonably dangerous
`
`condition.
`
`73.
`
`The conduct described herein was caused by the Defendants who negligently
`
`failed to warm buyers, including the Plaintiffs, regarding the risks and dangers associated with
`
`this product.
`
`74.
`
`The conduct described herein was caused by the Defendants whose product was
`
`defective and unreasonably dangerous and unfit for its intended uses and purposes becauseofits
`
`design, manufacture,
`
`testing,
`
`inspection, warranty, marketing, and/or warning, and hence
`
`suffered from design, manufacture, marketing and/or warning defects.
`
`75.
`
`The death of L.G. was a direct and proximateresult of Defendants’ conduct and
`
`omissions herein and the proximate cause of damagestothe Plaintiffs,
`
`76.
`
`Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves, seek damages for the fair monetary value of
`
`Decedent, L.G.’s life, including, but not limited to, compensation for the loss of the reasonably
`
`expected income, consortium, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship,
`
`attention, comfort, support, training, guidance, education, counsel, and advice of Decedent, L.G.
`
`77.
`
`Plaintiffs also seek damages for mental anguish, emotional pain and suffering,
`
`and in particularly for Plaintiff, April Taylor, those damages from witnessing her child dead
`
`and/or dying in the Rock ‘n Play.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 13 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 13 of 16
`
`78.
`
`Plaintiffs further seek recovery for all medical expenses, the reasonable funeral
`
`and burial expenses of Decedent, L.G., and non-pecuniary damages available, and any and all
`
`other available relief.
`
`COUNT VI - SURVIVAL ACTION
`
`Plaintiffs reallege the allegations in Paragraphs | through 78.
`
`Plaintiff, April Taylor, has been appointed personal representative of the estate of
`
`79.
`
`80.
`
`L.G.
`
`81.
`
`Plaintiff, April Taylor, sues in favor of the legal representatives, beneficiaries, and
`
`Estate of L.G. pursuant to the Survival Act, Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 6-401 et seq.,
`
`and seeksall damages provided by that statute and available under each cause ofaction resulting
`
`from the injuries sustained by Decedent, L.G. and Decedent, L.G.’s family, including, but not
`
`limited to, physical and emotional pain and suffering, agony of experiencing death, physical
`
`impairment, loss of life and loss of enjoyment oflife, emotional distress and mental anguish,
`
`medical expenses,lost earning capacity, and pre-deathfreight.
`
`82.
`
`Plaintiff, April Taylor, also seeks recovery for the reasonable funeral and burial
`
`expenses of Decedent, L.G. and any andall other availablerelief.
`
`COUNTVII - PUNITIVE DAMAGES
`
`83.
`
`84.
`
`Plaintiffs reallege the allegations of Paragraphs | through 82.
`
`Defendants acted in reckless disregard of the right of others and/or acted
`
`intentionally and with malice towards others.
`
`85.
`
`Defendant’s actions constitute actual malice and are evidence of evil motive and
`
`intent to injure consumers ofthe Rock ‘n Play includingPlaintiffs and Decedent.
`
`86.
`
`Defendants had actual knowledge of the defective nature of the subject Rock ‘n
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 14 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 14 of 16
`
`Play and deliberately disregarded the consequences of manufacturing, designing, marketing and
`
`selling a defective device to consumers including Plaintiffs.
`
`87.
`
` Decedent’s injury and death was foreseeable to Defendants because Defendants
`
`had actual knowledge of the unreasonably dangerous nature of the Rock ‘n Play for L.G. and
`
`other children.
`
`88.
`
`In addition to the individual damages sustained by Plaintiffs as a result of the
`
`death oftheir child, L.G., Defendants’ actions should be punishedasa result of the following:
`
`a. The seriousness of the hazard to the public arising from Defendants’
`
`misconduct;
`
`b.
`
`Theprofitability of the misconduct to the Defendants;
`
`c. The degree of the Defendants’
`
`awareness of the hazard and of its
`
`excessiveness;
`
`d.
`
`Theattitude and conduct of the Defendants upon discovery of the misconduct
`
`or hazard; and
`
`e. The financial condition of the Defendants.
`
`86.
`
`Additionally, there is clear and convincing evidence that the Defendants were
`
`guilty of reckless disregard for the rights of others.
`
`87.
`
`There is also clear and convincing evidence that the Defendants have acted
`
`intentionally and with malice towards others.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE,Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendants for damages,
`
`to
`
`whichPlaintiffs are entitled by law, as well as all costs of this action, interest and attorneys’ fees,
`
`to the full extent of the law, whether arising under the common law and/or statutory law,
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 15 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 15 of 16
`
`including:
`
`a.
`
`All special and economic damages,
`
`including, but not limited to, reasonable
`
`funeral and burial expenses of Decedent, past and future medical expenses, loss of
`
`earning capacity, benefits and income;
`
`Noneconomic damages, including, but not limited to, past and future pain, pre-
`
`death freight, suffering, physical
`
`impairment,
`
`filial care, parental care,
`
`lost
`
`consortium, financial support, mental anguish, emotional pain and suffering and
`
`emotional distress;
`
`The full value of Decedent’s life, including, without limitation, compensation for
`
`conscious pain and suffering, pre-death freight, emotional distress, mental
`
`anguish, the loss of his reasonably expected income, services, protection, care,
`
`assistance,
`
`society,
`
`companionship,
`
`affection,
`
`comfort,
`
`training, guidance,
`
`education, consortium, counsel and advice, and the monetary value of any
`
`benefits that Plaintiffs expect to receive from Decedenthadhelived;
`
`Pre and post judgmentinterest at the lawfulrate.
`
`Punitive damages;
`
`All recoverable interest;
`
`Award costs; and
`
`Grant such further andotherrelief as the Court, justice, or equity may require or
`
`deem proper in the circumstances.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiffs hereby demanda trial by jury onall issued presented herein andtriable as of
`
`right by jury.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 16 of 16
`Case 1:22-cv-01372-SAG Document 2 Filed 06/09/22 Page 16 of 16
`
`Dated: April 8. 2022
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`JENNER LAW,P.C.
`
`
`
`Robert K. Jenner (Bar No. 04615)
`Kathleen R. Kemer (Bar No. 18955)
`3600 Clipper Mill Road, Suite 240
`Baltimore, Maryland 21211
`Phone: (410) 413-2155
`Facsimile: (410) 982-0122
`kkernerféjennerlawtirm.com
`
`Andrew L.Payne(Pro Hac Viceto befiled)
`Texas Bar No. 00791416
`Cindra M. Dowd(Pro HacViceto be filed)
`VA Bar No. 33819
`PAYNE MITCHELL LAW GROUP
`3500 Maple Avenue, Suite 1250
`Dallas, Texas 75219
`Phone: (214) 252-1888
`Facsimile: (214) 252-1889
`andy@épaynemitchell.com
`cindra@paynemitchell.com
`
`Richard J. Serpe (Pro HacViceto befiled)
`VA BarNo. 33340
`LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD J. SERPE,P.C.
`580 E. Main Street, Suite 310
`Norfolk, VA 23510
`Phone: (757) 233-0009
`Facsimile: (757) 233-0455
`rserpe(@serpefirm.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
`
`16
`
`