Igloo Lawsuits Over Fingertip Amputations Warrant Centralization in MDL: Motion

Manufacturer warns additional cooler injury lawsuits are likely, potentially resulting in a dozen or more federal claims involving the recalled products.

A federal judicial panel is being asked to consolidate six product liability lawsuits that raise similar allegations involving severe finger injuries caused by tow handles on recalled Igloo 90 Quart Flip & Tow Rolling Coolers.

The motion (PDF) was brought by Igloo on October 2, asking the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to establish In re: Igloo 90 Quart Rolling Cooler Tow Handle Products Liability Litigation and transfer the cases to the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, with U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Hall overseeing the coordinated proceedings.

Igloo argues the lawsuits involve overlapping questions about the tow handle design, whether it poses a safety hazard, available alternative designs, the company’s knowledge of the alleged problem and its 2025 recall. The company maintains that allowing the cases to proceed separately would result in duplicative discovery and potentially inconsistent pretrial rulings.

Igloo Cooler Recall

The petition follows a recall of more than 1 million Igloo coolers announced by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in February 2025, due to fingertip amputation risks. At the time, federal regulators had received reports of at least 12 fingertip injuries, including lacerations, bone fractures and incidents where fingertips were cut off. The recall was later expanded to include at least 1.2 million coolers.

To date, at least six federal lawsuits have been filed against the manufacturer involving serious fingertip injuries allegedly caused by the tow handles on Igloo’s 90 Quart Flip & Tow Rolling Coolers. The claims generally maintain that the handles can trap or pinch fingers during foreseeable use due to an alleged design defect.

Igloo Cooler Finger Injury Lawsuits

The six federal lawsuits identified in Igloo’s motion involve similar finger injuries allegedly caused by the tow handles on 90 Quart Flip & Tow Rolling Coolers. While the circumstances vary, most of the incidents occurred as consumers were lifting, unloading or moving the coolers.

Gary Lee and Robert Randall McAlary III both claim they injured their left index fingers, with Lee’s injury occurring while lifting a cooler from a truck and McAlary’s while removing one from a bear-proof storage locker.

David Bruce also alleges he injured his left index finger while retrieving a cooler from a bear box. Erwin Carlin Jr. suffered an alleged injury to his left middle finger while unloading a cooler. Although Carlin’s original complaint did not identify the component involved, Igloo indicates that he subsequently linked the injury to the tow handle during informal discovery.

In another case, Eric Daniel Cooke claims the tow handle injured his right ring finger while unloading a cooler from a pickup truck. Jose Porfirio Lardizabal-Cueva similarly alleges an injury to his left index finger while moving a cooler inside his vehicle.

All six lawsuits raise product liability claims involving the alleged finger-entrapment hazard, citing Igloo’s 2025 cooler recall as evidence supporting their allegations.

Igloo Cooler Lawsuit MDL

According to the motion, the cases will require much of the same discovery involving company documents, interrogatory responses, corporate witnesses and experts. Igloo maintains that most case-specific discovery would be limited to how each cooler was being handled and the resulting injuries.

Igloo argues that without centralization, five or more federal courts could establish separate schedules and resolve overlapping discovery disputes, expert challenges and summary judgment motions. The company maintains an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, would reduce litigation costs and the risk of inconsistent rulings involving the alleged defect, its knowledge of the problem and potential alternative designs.

Judge Hall is already overseeing In re: Igloo Products Cooler Recall Litigation, a consolidated proposed class action involving the same recall and alleged tow handle defect. That proceeding has been pending for more than 18 months, with a protective order and discovery schedule already established and substantial document production completed.

Igloo is not asking the JPML to include that class action in the proposed personal injury MDL, acknowledging it involves different claims, liability theories and remedies. However, the company argues Judge Hall’s familiarity with the underlying defect and recall makes Delaware the logical venue for the coordinated proceedings.

The company maintains further filings are likely, noting that four of the six federal cases were filed within the previous 60 days. The company says it has already received five additional injury demands, potentially resulting in a dozen or more federal cases.

The JPML is expected to schedule a hearing where attorneys for the parties can present arguments supporting or opposing the proposed centralization. Following that hearing, the panel will decide whether the Igloo cooler lawsuits should be consolidated into an MDL for coordinated pretrial proceedings and, if so, which federal judge should oversee the litigation.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.