Tablesaws and Lawyers
- on 07.14.10
- Bits & Pieces
- 5 Comments
- Digg
- Del.icio.us
Maybe good ole William Shakespeare was correct, when he wrote one of the best known quotes” let’s kill all the lawyers”. Actually this was only part of the statement uttered during Shakespeare’s Henry the VI play. The entire line goes “first thing we do is kill all the lawyers” and was referring to ways that the rebellion could succeed. While I haven’t read any of Shakespeare’s works since I left school, and even back then I didn’t totally relate to his work, I can appreciate the sentiments of his statement.
I recently read an article, “Tablesaws on Trial, in the new issue of Wood Magazine* relating the facts of a law suit filed in Boston Mass., where a 25 year old woodworker was injured while using a tablesaw. According to papers filed in court one Carlos Osorio was working on repairing hardwood flooring for a small Boston company. He reportedly was using a Ryobi Bench top tablesaw and attempted to free hand rip a piece of flooring. During the ripping action, the piece of flooring kicked and his left hand went into the blade. Carlos suffered a near amputation of one finger and serious injury to two other fingers. The injury to the two fingers left Carlos with limited use of those two fingers. Being a woodworker who has also suffered a hand injury on a tablesaw I feel for Carlos. No one wants to see anyone injured or maimed.
But Carlos, who freely admits that his tablesaw did not have the blade guard or splitter installed, decided to file a lawsuit. His lawsuit was not against his employer, nor was it against the home owner; his lawsuit was against the parent company of Ryobi. The basis of the lawsuit was that Ryobi failed to incorporate the “Flesh Detecting “technology like that on the SawStop tablesaw which could have lessened the severity of his injuries.
Carlo’s lawyer argued that the flesh detecting technology had been offered to Ryobi, and several other manufactures of tablesaws years ago, and these manufacturers, for a multitude of reasons, elected not to incorporate the technology. According to court papers, Carlos’ lawyer stated that the saw was defectively designed because it did not include the technology. Wow, a corporate business decision not to include an option, now equates to bad design. The shocking part of this story is that the court awarded Carlos a whopping $1.5 million dollars for his injury.
What bothers me is not the award, although the amount of money is staggering. What bothers me is the entry of good olde Willy Shakespeare’s lawyers into mine and your workshop. Woodworkers are always welcome, but Lawyers…………..
* “Tablesaws on Trial” Wood Magazine September 2010 pg 28-29

