LumberJocks

Transcripts of Testimony of Ryobi lawsuit on Wood

  • Advertise with us
Blog entry by David Craig posted 1596 days ago 2540 reads 0 times favorited 31 comments Add to Favorites Watch

I know this topic has been beat to death here, I mean really clubbed good. But Wood has an interesting accounting of the trial regarding Mr. Osorio and the lawsuit regarding the mishap with the Ryobi saw here. While my opinion holds firm that Ryobi is not at fault for not having “flesh sensing technology,” the transcripts of the case point out that Carlos was fairly new at woodworking and his company presented the saw sans blade guard and splitter. It is a good read to at least understand the case and how Carlos ended up injured. If anything, I think the pressure that is currently put on the saw companies to make their saws accident proof should be redirected to employers making sure that the saws they use on the site is equipped with the safety features that do come with the saw.

David

-- There is little that is simple when it comes to making a simple box.



31 comments so far

View hObOmOnk's profile

hObOmOnk

1381 posts in 2760 days


#1 posted 1596 days ago

-- 温故知新

View David Craig's profile

David Craig

2135 posts in 1741 days


#2 posted 1596 days ago

Ouch! if it weren’t for the resulting lawsuit, would make a funny t-shirt for tshirthell.com.

-- There is little that is simple when it comes to making a simple box.

View David "Lucky Dawg" Brown's profile

David "Lucky Dawg" Brown

440 posts in 1625 days


#3 posted 1596 days ago

I totally agree with you!
Same things happen where I work in the metal fab.

-- dumpster diver delux

View SteveMI's profile

SteveMI

849 posts in 1927 days


#4 posted 1596 days ago

I don’t understand why the contractor wasn’t part of the suit due to providing the saw without the factory guard or splitter unless his pockets weren’t deep enough for the lawyer.

Wonder if permanent (welded) guard assemblies and splitters won’t become required of saw manufacturers.

In reading about the sawstop technology, I wonder how well it works in high humidity enviornments. It would seem to be prone to a number of false activations.

At the moment I have a bit of ill feelings against sawstop for their very biased testimony against Ryobi, but if my finances allowed one of their saws I would have to very very seriously consider it.

Steve.

View GregD's profile

GregD

614 posts in 1769 days


#5 posted 1596 days ago

ROFL!

I don’t mean to pick on Ryobi. Safety is really hard. Even in the best of situations it can still be easy for a brief moment of carelessness or a brain-fart to turn into a life-changing event.

Randy, if you start taking orders, I want a couple. I think wearing one of these would help remind me to pay attention in the shop – and I even have a Saw Stop!

-- Greg D.

View David Craig's profile

David Craig

2135 posts in 1741 days


#6 posted 1596 days ago

I think sawstop came up with a brilliant technology, but even the flesh sensor can be turned off. I think the argument that Ryobi was at fault would be much stronger if the protective equipment were on the saw. I am sure the attorney weighed who would have the better ability to pay his client, and if the contractor is investing in cheap equipment and cheap labor, they probably would not have sufficient means to pay any large settlement. I really feel for the guy. He was improperly trained, was not given sufficient tools, and was performing very dangerous freehand cuts. I just don’t feel that should have been put on Ryobi’s shoulders.

-- There is little that is simple when it comes to making a simple box.

View Eric_S's profile

Eric_S

1521 posts in 1828 days


#7 posted 1596 days ago

Ryobi shouldn’t be held at fault at all. I agree it should be the employer for not utilizing all the safety features that the saw offered. Ryobi has detailed warnings abot how to properly use their saws and to keep fingers away, I own one and there are warnings all over the manual.

-- - Eric Indianapolis, IN

View David Craig's profile

David Craig

2135 posts in 1741 days


#8 posted 1596 days ago

As far as the t-shirt goes, remove the RYOBI and it is still funny and less controversial. Would make a good selling, would not be dated, and would remind all of us to be more careful.

-- There is little that is simple when it comes to making a simple box.

View hObOmOnk's profile

hObOmOnk

1381 posts in 2760 days


#9 posted 1596 days ago

-- 温故知新

View AzChiefFan's profile

AzChiefFan

19 posts in 1960 days


#10 posted 1596 days ago

In looking at the verdict form several of the questions are stating the Ryobi saw was defective. I’m not sure that I saw anything stating why they consider it defective. Does anyone know was it considered defective because it did not have the new technology to stop when contacting flesh or was there something more that they considered it defective for? If it is simply considered defective due to not using more expensive current technology it sets a horrible precedent for those lacking common sense to purchase a lesser quality product then blame the manufacturer for not having the best options even though the consumer consciously purchased the product trying to save money over a higher quality product knowing those features were not included.

You Can’t fix stupid!!!

-- AzChiefFan "Measure Once, Curse Twice"

View Greg..the Cajun  Box Sculptor's profile

Greg..the Cajun Box Sculptor

5015 posts in 1941 days


#11 posted 1596 days ago

What will be next? Flesh sensing technology on every power tool made? How about a sensor for our routers, band saws, planers, jointers…etc., etc., etc….
I am sure Saw Stop would like this because they would make an absolute fortune from their patent of the technology. They make an terriffic saw with great safety features.. but it is way out of the affordability range of many woodworkers.

-- If retiring is having the time to be able to do what you enjoy then I have always been retired.

View David Craig's profile

David Craig

2135 posts in 1741 days


#12 posted 1596 days ago

Not sure Martin would like that version of the t-shirt. I would still stick with the design sans any company logo.

Looks like feelings are still strong regarding the verdict. I was glad to be able to read the transcripts because it confirmed what I suspected, that the accident occurred because blade guard and splitter was not installed on the saw.

-- There is little that is simple when it comes to making a simple box.

View Abbott's profile

Abbott

2570 posts in 1936 days


#13 posted 1596 days ago

I would like to sawstop tech on my pants zipper! I can live without it on my table saw.

Great shirts Hobomonk!

-- Ohh mann...pancakes and boobies...I'll bet that's what Heaven is like! ♣ ♣ ♣ ♣

View David "Lucky Dawg" Brown's profile

David "Lucky Dawg" Brown

440 posts in 1625 days


#14 posted 1596 days ago

If your turn off or take off the safety equipment then
your at your own risk in my eyes!
Whether we like it or not the safety equipt. is there for a reason!

Love the shirt idea even though I am a fan Ryobi!!!!!!

I’d wear it!!!!!!!!!!!

-- dumpster diver delux

View chewbuddy13's profile

chewbuddy13

150 posts in 1918 days


#15 posted 1596 days ago

The company should be to blame. I had a guy that worked for me once that started to remove the guard on my mitersaw, and I specifically told him not to. I came back to the jobsite later and guess what, the guard was off. I told him that if he wanted to keep his job to put it back on. A few days later I ended up firing him for it. I had no problem doing it, cause knew that if he hurt himself, my company was on the line.

showing 1 through 15 of 31 comments

Have your say...

You must be signed in to post the comments.

DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

HomeRefurbers.com

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

GardenTenders.com :: gardening showcase