New York Verdicts

Find out about the most important recent New York cases, selected by VerdictSearch editors. Coverage includes Bronx, Kings, Queens, New York, Nassau, Suffolk and Westchester counties. Subscribe to VerdictSearch for access to all New York verdictsPricing Options

Canister’s defect led to fatal burst of fire, estate alleged

Amount:

$3,750,000

Type:

Mediated Settlement

State:

New York

Venue:

Kings County

Court:

Kings Supreme

Injury Type(s):

brain-coma; burns-third degree; burns-second degree; other-death; surgeries/treatment-skin graft; pulmonary/respiratory-respiratory

Case Type:

Products Liability – Design Defect, Strict Liability, Manufacturing Defect

Case Name:

Huu Thien Tran as Administrator of the Estate of Khanh Toan Tran, Deceased, and Zhu Ai Chen v. Worthington Industries, Inc. Worthington Cylinder Corporation, Inc., Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC and 65/6 Economy Enterprises Inc.,
No. 4777/10

Date:

February 27, 2014

Parties

Plaintiff(s):

Zhu Ai Chen (Female, 37 Years), 

Estate of Khanh Toan Tran (Male, 40 Years)

Plaintiff Attorney(s):

Jay W. Dankner;
Dankner, Milstein & Ruffo, P.C.;
New York,
NY,
for
Zhu Ai Chen, Estate of Khanh Toan Tran

Plaintiff Expert(s):

Alan Leiken;
Ph.D.;
Economics;
Stony Brook,
NY called by
Jay W. Dankner ■ Karl Puttlitz;
Ph.D.;
Metallurgy;
Wappingers Falls,
NY called by
Jay W. Dankner ■ Robert Zalosh;
Ph.D., P.E.;
Fuel Fires;
Wellesley,
MA called by
Jay W. Dankner ■ Richard Hoffman;
P.E.;
Metallurgy;
Brewster,
NY called by
Jay W. Dankner

Defendant(s):

Worthington Cylinder Corp., 

Worthington Industries Inc., 

65/6 Economy Enterprises Inc., 

Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC

Defense Attorney(s):

Eric J. Berger;
Cozen O’Connor;
New York,
NY,
for
Worthington Cylinder Corp., Worthington Industries Inc., 65/6 Economy Enterprises Inc., Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC ■ John J. McDonough;
Cozen O’Connor;
New York,
NY,
for
Worthington Cylinder Corp., Worthington Industries Inc., 65/6 Economy Enterprises Inc., Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC ■ Paul J. Zola;
Cozen O’Connor;
New York,
NY,
for
Worthington Cylinder Corp., Worthington Industries Inc., 65/6 Economy Enterprises Inc., Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC ■ Richard A. Ergo;
Bowles & Verna LLP;
Walnut Creek,
CA,
for
Worthington Cylinder Corp., Worthington Industries Inc., Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC

Defendant Expert(s):

R. Long Jr.;
Fire Science;
Bowie,
MD called by
Eric J. Berger, John J. McDonough, Paul J. Zola ■ Joseph Sala;
Ergonomics/Human Factors;
Philadelphia,
PA called by
Eric J. Berger, John J. McDonough, Paul J. Zola ■ Thomas Eagar;
Metallurgy;
Cambridge,
MA called by
Eric J. Berger, John J. McDonough, Paul J. Zola

Insurer(s):

Travelers Property Casualty Corp. for all defendants (primary insurer);
Ace Group of Cos. for all defendants (excess)

Facts:

On Jan. 27, 2008, plaintiff’s decedent Khanh Toan Tran, 40, an employee of the U.S. Postal Service, was renovating the kitchen of his home, which was located in the Bensonhurst section of Brooklyn. During the course of the project, Tran attempted to solder a pipe. He located a brass soldering torch, and he attached a canister that contained a stabilized mixture of methylacetylene and propadiene. The canister’s contents subsequently ignited, and Tran was engulfed by flames that caused fatal burns. Tran’s father, Huu Thien Tran, acting as the administrator of his son’s estate, sued the canister’s manufacturer, Columbus, Ohio-based Worthington Cylinder Corp.; a related entity, Columbus-based Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC; the companies’ parent, Columbus-based Worthington Industries Inc.; and the retailer that sold the specific canister that the younger Tran used, Brooklyn-based 65/6 Economy Enterprises Inc. The estate alleged that the canister was defectively designed and manufactured, that the defect caused the younger Tran’s injuries, that Worthington Industries and its subsidiaries were liable for the defect, and that 65/6 Economy Enterprises was strictly liable for the defect. The estate’s counsel claimed that the accident occurred while Tran was attempting to ignite the torch. The estate’s expert metallurgists submitted reports in which they opined that the accident was a result of gas having escaped out of a cracked portion of the canister. They contended that the crack was located near the housing that connected to the torch, and they suggested that the defect was a result of phosphorus having been used during Worthington Cylinder’s brazing of the canister. They claimed that phosphorus weakened the canister, and the estate’s expert engineer submitted a report in which he opined that a relatively minor force could have caused a crack that would have completed a "fire triangle," which comprises a flammable substance, oxygen and a source of ignition. The expert contended that the result would have been the creation of a large fireball. The estate’s counsel estimated that 20 similar accidents had been caused by defects of the same brand of canister. He noted that the canister’s manufacturing rights had been acquired in 2004, and he claimed that Worthington Cylinder immediately pursued the development of a brazing process that did not include phosphorus. The process could not be developed, and the canisters’ production ended in 2008. Defense counsel acknowledged prior accidents that involved the same brand of canister, but they claimed that the incidents were a result of users having abused the canisters. The defense’s expert metallurgist submitted a report in which he noted that the canister was composed of low-carbon steel. He opined that phosphorus could not embrittle low-carbon steel. The defense’s expert engineer submitted a report in which he opined that the accident was not a result of a minor force having cracked the canister. He suggested that Tran tripped, fell onto the canister and caused a resultant fracture of the canister. Defense counsel noted that Tran’s feet were bare, that tools were strewn about the floor of Tran’s kitchen, that Tran’s soldering torch was bent to an angle of 45 degrees, and that an autopsy indicated that Tran was suffering fractures of his left ankle and his left foot.

Injury:

Tran sustained second- and third-degree burns of the unclothed areas of his body. He was placed in an ambulance, and he was transported to a hospital, where a coma was induced. He required mechanical control of his respiration, and he underwent extensive treatment that included the application of grafts of skin. He did not emerge from his coma, and he died after 30 days had passed. Tran was survived by a wife, a 9-year-old son and a 7-year-old son. Tran’s estate sought recovery of wrongful-death damages that included $250,000 for past medical expenses, $4 million for lost earnings and benefits, and unspecified damages for Tran’s pain and suffering. Tran’s widow, Zhu Ai Chen, presented a derivative claim.

Result:

During the day that preceded the scheduled selection of a jury, the parties negotiated a settlement, which was finalized via the guidance of mediator Ronnie Bernon Gallina, of Jams. The defendants’ primary insurer tendered its policy, which provided $2 million of coverage, and the defendants’ excess insurer agreed to pay $1.75 million, from a policy that provided $25 million of coverage. Thus, the settlement totaled $3.75 million.

Trial Information:

Judge:

Ronnie Bernon Gallina

Editor’s Comment:

This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiffs’ and defense counsel.