If a defective product caused a chemical burn in your armpit, California law may allow you to bring a claim against the company that made it. Whether you have a claim depends on what happened, and only a doctor can confirm what kind of injury you have.
Three things matter first: get medical care, keep the product and your records, and act promptly, because California deadlines are strict (see the deadlines section below). This page from H Law Group explains each step.
Get medical care first
A chemical burn is skin damage caused by a chemical rather than heat. Burns are graded from first degree to third degree by how deep they go.
For a chemical on the skin, MedlinePlus advises removing affected clothing and jewelry, brushing off any dry chemical and rinsing with cool running water for at least 15 minutes.
Serious burns need medical care right away. If your burn may be serious, call 911.
Stop using the product. Tell the doctor what you used, for how long and when symptoms started. Only a doctor can say whether this is a burn, an allergic reaction or something else.
What to keep and how to report the reaction
The product itself is often the most important evidence. Keep:
- The product, even if nearly empty. Do not return or discard it.
- The packaging and label.
- Proof of purchase, such as a receipt or order confirmation.
- Medical records and bills.
- A note of when you started the product and when symptoms began.
You can report a reaction to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration through its MedWatch online form or Form FDA 3500B.
If a product caused this, California law may apply
Under Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc., a manufacturer can be liable when a defect in its product injures someone, without proof that it was careless. This is called strict liability. You would still need to show that the product had a defect and that the defect caused your injury.
A missing warning is one kind of defect. Under Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., a manufacturer may be liable for not warning about risks that were known or knowable when the product was distributed. That is one reason to keep the label.
H Law Group's California attorneys can review what happened and explain your options.
Common causes
A product type appears here only where a filed public lawsuit has alleged this kind of injury. An allegation is not proof, and a listing does not mean a product caused your injury.
- Underarm deodorants. Deodorant products have been the subject of chemical burn allegations in a filed lawsuit.
- Old Spice deodorant, allegations only. In a 2016 federal lawsuit in Ohio, Colley, No. 1:16-cv-918 (S.D. Ohio), plaintiffs alleged that Old Spice deodorant caused "burning, rashes, irritation, scarring, discoloration, scabbing, peeling skin" beyond the "rash" or "irritation" they said the label warned about. The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case in December 2016, and no court found that the product caused any injury. It was an Ohio federal case, not a California decision.
Sources
- Colley v. Proctor & Gamble Co. et al, No. 1:2016cv00918 - Document 30 (S.D. Ohio 2016), Justia. Colley v. Procter & Gamble Co., No. 1:16-cv-918 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 4, 2016), Doc. 30
- COLLEY v. PROCTER & GAMBL | Case No... | 20170103473 | Leagle.com, Leagle. Colley v. Procter & Gamble Co., No. 1:16-cv-918 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 1, 2016), Doc. 32
- 16-918 - Colley v. Proctor & Gamble Co. et al, U.S. Government Publishing Office (GovInfo). Colley v. Proctor & Gamble Co. et al, No. 1:16-cv-00918 (S.D. Ohio)
- How to Report a Cosmetic Product Related Complaint, U.S. Food and Drug Administration
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration Final Administrative Order (OTC000015), U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA OTC Monograph M019, Final Administrative Order OTC000015
- 21 CFR Ch. I (4-1-23 Edition) Pt. 350 PART 350 ANTIPERSPIRANT DRUG PRODUCTS FOR OVER-THE-COUNTER HUMAN USE, U.S. Government Publishing Office (GovInfo). 21 C.F.R. pt. 350 (Apr. 1, 2023 ed.)
- Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc., 59 Cal.2d 57 (1963), Supreme Court of California Resources (SCOCAL), Stanford Law School. 59 Cal.2d 57
- Barker v. Lull Engineering Co., 20 Cal.3d 413 (1978), Supreme Court of California Resources (SCOCAL), Stanford Law School. 20 Cal.3d 413
- Chemical burn or reaction, MedlinePlus, U.S. National Library of Medicine
- Burns, MedlinePlus, U.S. National Library of Medicine
- Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 53 Cal.3d 987 (1991), Supreme Court of California Resources (SCOCAL), Stanford Law School. 53 Cal.3d 987
Deadlines to file a California product-liability claim
California's default deadline for a product liability personal injury claim is two years from the date of injury under Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1. Different deadlines apply in several common situations:
- Injuries to minors: the clock is generally tolled until the minor's 18th birthday under Code of Civil Procedure § 352(a).
- Wrongful death claims: governed by Code of Civil Procedure §§ 335.1 and 377.60; the two-year period runs from the date of death, not the date of injury, and only certain family members may bring the claim.
- Injuries discovered later: under the discovery rule, the clock may not start until you knew or reasonably should have known that a product caused your injury.
- Government defendants: shorter deadlines apply, including a six-month claim-filing requirement under the Government Claims Act.
Deadlines are strict and case-specific. If you think a product injured you or a family member, contact an attorney promptly. Waiting can end your right to file even a strong case.