More firefighters file civil lawsuit claiming hearing damage from sirens
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 5:57 p.m.
Ten more Pittsburgh firefighters filed a civil lawsuit on Wednesday against the manufacturer of sirens and fire trucks, claiming the loud sounds permanently injured their hearing.
The firefighters — seven of whom have been employed by the city since 1993 and three since 2001 — said the companies “knew or should have known that the products ... were inherently dangerous, defective and hazardous to human hearing” and “are strictly liable” for their hearing loss. Four Pittsburgh firefighters filed an almost identical lawsuit on Monday and have the same attorneys.
Representatives from two of the companies — Federal Signal Corp. of Illinois and Mack Trucks of Allentown — this week said they will fight the lawsuits and believe they lack merit.
Other companies named in the lawsuit are: American LaFrance of South Carolina, E-One Inc. of Florida, Kovatch Mobile Equipment Corp. of Carbon County, Pierce Manufacturing Inc. of Wisconsin and Seagrave Fire Apparatus LLC of Harrisburg. Officials from those companies did not return calls seeking comment.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Garden Q&A: Firecracker vine OK for trellis?
- Three ejected after Pirates, Brewers brawl
- Starkey: Penguins’ arrogance astounding
- Egg decorating turns to fight, charges in Brookline, police say
- Cool chemistry: Programs at Springdale library take inspiration from late science professor
- Plum man revels in Keystone hall of fame induction
- Choral concerts planned in Dawson church
- Six NA students finalists in Musical Kids competition
- Bridge work planned for Route 68 in Brady’s Bend
- Hillside repairs to cost $35K more than expected
- Study to target pool use at Belmont Complex