Instant Pot Burn Caused By Failure of Pressure Cooker Safety Features: Lawsuit

Lawsuit alleges that an Instant Pot failed to prevent the lid from being removed while the contents were cooking, causing severe pressure cooker burns

An Alabama man has filed a lawsuit over Instant Pot burns experienced after his pressure cooker’s safety features failed, allowing the top to be removed while the contents were still cooking, causing scalding hot contents to be sprayed on his body.

The complaint (PDF) was filed by Jeffrey Frank in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama on March 14, presenting claims against the manufacturer, Instant Brands, Inc., for failing to redesign the pressure cooker with safer alternative safety features that may have prevent the explosion.

Instant Pots pressure cookers have been widely marketed over the past decade as a safe and effective kitchen appliance, suggesting that using the modern electronic device is “everyday magic”, and indicating that advanced safety mechanisms overcome traditional problems with pressure cookers exploding. However, Lewis joins a growing number of consumers now pursuing Instant Pot pressure cooker lawsuits, after safety features failed and the devices exploded, ejecting scalding hot liquid and contents.

PRESSURE COOKER LAWSUITS

Were you injured by an exploding pressure cooker?

Faulty and defective designs may cause a pressure cooker to explode, resulting in severe burns and injuries.

Learn More About this Lawsuit See If You Qualify For Compensation

Lewis indicates he suffered serious and substantial Instant Pot burn injuries in March 2021, when he was able to rotate and open the lid on the pressure cooker not knowing the contents were still under pressure.

“The incident occurred as a result of the failure of the pressure cooker’s supposed ‘safety mechanisms,’ which purport to keep the consumer safe while using the pressure cooker,” the lawsuit states. “In addition, the incident occurred as a result of Defendant’s failure to redesign the pressure cooker, despite the existence of economical, safer alternative designs.”

The lawsuit claims the manufacturer aggressively marketed and advertised the Instant Pot pressure cookers had safety mechanisms which should have prevented Lewis’s injuries.

Pressure Cooker Burn Lawsuits

Modern electronic pressure cookers have become increasingly popular in recent decades, amid marketing that has promoted advanced safety features that were supposed to prevent pressure cooker explosions that have plagued older, stove-top designs. Products have been marketed under a number of brand names, through social media, websites and home shopping stations.

Most of the problems involve similar pressure cooker burn injuries which occurred after the lid was removed while the contents were still under high pressure, typically resulting in burns covering a large percentage of the user’s body. However, other injuries linked to pressure cookers have included eye injuries, broken bones and other complications that resulted from electrocutions, spills or explosions.

As more of these electric pressure cookers have been introduced in recent years, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has issued several pressure cooker recalls over problems where lids were able to be opened while contents are under pressure, allowing hot contents to be expelled and causing a scald or burn injury to individuals in the immediate area.

Contact A Lawyer

Did You Experience a Pressure Cooker Burn Injury?

Lawyers provide free claim evaluations to help determine if financial compensation may be available through a pressure cooker settlement, as a result of the manufacturers' failure to redesign their products.

FIND OUT IF YOU QUALIFY FOR A SETTLEMENT

0 Comments

Share Your Comments

I authorize the above comments be posted on this page*

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

More Top Stories

Johnson & Johnson Faces Medical Monitoring Lawsuit Over Future Baby Powder Cancer Risks
Johnson & Johnson Faces Medical Monitoring Lawsuit Over Future Baby Powder Cancer Risks (Posted today)

Women who used Johnson's Baby Powder around their genitals for feminine hygiene purposes now live in fear of developing ovarian cancer, according to the class action lawsuit seeking medical monitoring for future diagnoses

More Than 9,600 Join Suboxone Lawsuit Over Tooth Decay in MDL Filing
More Than 9,600 Join Suboxone Lawsuit Over Tooth Decay in MDL Filing (Posted yesterday)

A bundled complaint of about 9,600 Suboxone lawsuits were filed in federal court on Friday, ahead of the two-year anniversary of the FDA requiring tooth decay label warnings on the opioid treatment film strips, which is also a deadline for filing a civil complaint in many states.