New York Toy Defect Injury Lawyers

When a parent or caregiver provides a toy to a child, they typically expect that the toy has been thoroughly tested for dangers, defects and any properties that could cause serious injury or death.  Unfortunately, defects still slip through the cracks despite testing and other safety practices. In some instances a novel design may give rise to unanticipated problems, while in others the manufacturing of the toy may be suspect.

At Sullivan & Galleshaw our attorneys believe that regardless of the exact defect or reason for injury, no child deserves to be hurt by an object that was supposed to bring joy. Furthermore, parents and caregivers should not live with guilt for trusting a company to provide a safe product. Our attorneys fight to hold the company, corporation or individual who provided the defective toy financially responsible for your child’s pain, suffering, and other potentially life-long consequences

The Categories of Defects That Can Be Found in Toys

In general there are two main types of defects when the toy itself has a problem: design defects and manufacturing defects.

A design defect occurs when there is a mistake or other problem with the actual formulation or design of the product. That is, even is the product was manufactured exactly according to specifications, there would still be a problem, with it that would make the toy unreasonably dangerous for its intended uses. For instance consider if the plans for a toy called for the use of a type of plastic that tended to shear and crack after use creating small, sharp plastic pieces. These tiny, sharp pieces can result in lacerations to a child’s face, hands and mouth while also presenting a choking hazard. This type of defect would be considered a design defect.

In contrast, a manufacturing defect occurs when a product is properly designed, but the manufacturing process or the act of manufacturing introduces a defect to the product or toy. Now let’s reconsider the hypothetical toy we discussed in the last paragraph, but this time let’s assume that the design calls for high-quality plastic that is likely to last for the foreseeable life of the toy. However, when the manufacturer of the product places the plastic in the mold to create the toy, he selects the wrong type of plastic – the one that shears and breaks easily. Likewise, this defect can pieces can result in lacerations to a child’s face, hands and mouth while also presenting a choking hazard. While the physical problem is the same in both instances, one can now see the differences in how the defect was introduced to the toy.

Injuries due to defects can also occur for reasons besides the physical product. Incorrect or incomplete instructions can lead to improper usage of the product. Furthermore incomplete warnings and advisories may cause an individual to be unaware of a potential risk of the product.

What Types of Specific Injury Hazards Are the Most Common for Toys?

The potential defects in a children’s toy are extremely numerous. However, certain defects are more prevalent than others. These hazards include:

  • Choking hazard due to small parts
  • Cuts
  • Burns
  • Presence of lead contamination
  • Intestinal perforation due to small magnets
  • Fire hazards

The attorneys of Sullivan & Galleshaw are dedicating to fighting for children and their families who have been affected by defective and dangerous toys. To schedule your free & confidential product defect consultation, call 877-311-4878 or contact us online.


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

What Our Clients Say:

“James is the best lawyer I have ever had. I would strongly recommend him. I would even go as far as to say you would have to be crazy to use anyone else. He is extremely knowledgeable, quick thinker and always available to answer your questions. He is motivated, energetic and will do whatever it takes to win. The best quality James has and one that you will not find in other lawyers is that HE CARES!!!.”


Recent Result:

$3,400,000Work Injury Settlement

The client, a sanitation worker, fell over a pothole inside the depot yard; They required knee, wrist and elbow surgery. They were approved for ¾ pay and Social Security Disability Insurance.

View more results