A table saw took your fingers in a fraction of a second. Flesh-detection technology that stops the blade in five milliseconds has existed since 2004. This page explains the design-defect claim and the deadlines that apply in Florida.
Call 904-383-7448Reviewed by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., Florida Bar No. 39104, Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm. Last updated .
In Florida, a person who loses fingers or a hand to a table saw blade can bring a product-liability claim against the manufacturer for design defect. The core theory is that the saw was sold without a feasible safer alternative, the SawStop-style flesh-detection brake that drops and stops the blade in roughly five milliseconds when it senses skin. That technology has been commercially available since 2004. A jury in Osorio v. One World Technologies, Inc., 659 F.3d 81 (1st Cir. 2011), found a Ryobi benchtop saw defectively designed for lacking it and awarded $1.5 million. Florida adopted strict products liability in West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 1976). The Florida deadline for a product-liability injury claim is four years under section 95.11(3)(d), Florida Statutes, subject to a 12-year statute of repose under section 95.031(2)(b). Graham W. Syfert, Esq., Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm, handles these claims. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
You touched a spinning table saw blade and lost a finger, several fingers, or part of a hand. The injury is permanent. You want to know whether the manufacturer can be held responsible. In many cases the answer is yes, and the reason is a design choice the manufacturer made.
Since 2004, a flesh-detection brake has been sold on consumer table saws. The system senses skin contact and stops the blade in about five milliseconds, dropping it below the table. The difference is the loss of a finger versus a small nick. Most table saws on the market still ship without it.
Florida law lets an injured person sue a product manufacturer for a design defect when a feasible safer alternative existed and was not adopted. The claim does not require proof that the company was careless. It requires proof that the product was unreasonably dangerous as designed. The deadline to file is four years under section 95.11(3)(d), Florida Statutes.
Graham W. Syfert, Esq., is Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm. He evaluates table saw amputation claims for injured woodworkers, carpenters, flooring installers, and hobbyists in Florida and Southeast Georgia. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Two failure modes drive most table saw amputations. The first is direct blade contact, when a hand slips into the spinning blade. The second is kickback, when the workpiece binds against the blade and is thrown back at the operator, often dragging the hand across the teeth in the same motion.
A standard ten-inch blade turns at roughly 3,000 to 5,000 RPM. A human cannot pull a hand back fast enough to matter. By the time the body reacts, the cut is finished. The injury happens faster than thought.
Flesh-detection technology monitors a small electrical signal on the blade. Because skin is conductive and wood is not, contact with a finger changes the signal. The system fires an aluminum brake into the blade and drops it below the table in about five milliseconds, faster than a car airbag deploys.
The design-defect argument is direct. The hazard was known. A proven safer alternative existed and was for sale. The manufacturer chose to sell the saw without it. That choice is the defect.
Kickback occurs when the cut wood pinches the blade or contacts the rising rear teeth and is launched toward the operator. A riving knife, a thin metal plate that follows the blade, reduces pinching. A modern blade guard reduces contact. Many older saws shipped without a riving knife, and many guards were so awkward that users removed them.
Kickback and blade contact often combine. The wood jumps, the hand follows, and the hand reaches the blade. A claim can rest on inadequate guarding, the absence of a riving knife, the absence of flesh detection, or all three together.
SawStop is the brand most associated with flesh-detection braking on table saws. Stephen Gass, a patent lawyer and woodworker, developed the technology, and the first SawStop saw was sold in 2004. TTS Tooltechnic Systems, the parent of Festool, acquired SawStop in 2017.
The system runs a 200-kilohertz signal through the blade. When skin contact changes the signal, a spring releases an aluminum brake into the teeth. The blade stops in roughly five milliseconds and retracts below the table surface. SawStop publishes demonstrations of hot dogs and fingers contacting the blade with only a shallow nick.
The existence and availability of this technology is the spine of a design-defect claim. A plaintiff argues that the manufacturer of the saw that hurt you could have adopted a flesh-detection brake, that the cost was reasonable relative to the harm prevented, and that the failure to adopt it made the saw unreasonably dangerous. In 2024, SawStop stated it would dedicate one key patent to the public if a federal rule required the technology, which speaks to feasibility.
The brand and model of the saw that injured you matter. Specific Ryobi benchtop models have been the subject of design-defect trials. Other manufacturers, including makers sold under Ridgid, DeWalt, Bosch, Skil, and Craftsman names, sell saws without flesh detection. Each saw is evaluated on its own design, date of manufacture, and available alternatives.
Carlos Osorio was cutting flooring on a Ryobi BTS15 benchtop saw when his hand slid into the blade. A Massachusetts federal jury found the saw defectively designed for lacking flesh-detection technology and awarded $1.5 million. The First Circuit affirmed in Osorio v. One World Technologies, Inc., 659 F.3d 81 (1st Cir. 2011).
In Stollings v. Ryobi Techs., Inc., 725 F.3d 753 (7th Cir. 2013), the plaintiff lost his index finger and parts of other fingers in a kickback on a Ryobi BTS20R. He alleged the saw was defective for lacking a riving knife and flesh-detection braking. The Seventh Circuit vacated a defense verdict and remanded after finding the trial improperly admitted argument that the case was a venture to force licensing of the braking technology.
Bosch sold a competing flesh-detection saw called the REAXX, which used a gas cartridge to drop the blade rather than an aluminum brake. SawStop sued for patent infringement at the U.S. International Trade Commission. The ITC found infringement and issued an exclusion and cease-and-desist order. The order took effect March 27, 2017, after the presidential review period.
Bosch and SawStop later settled, and the settlement permits Bosch to sell the REAXX in the United States, but Bosch has chosen not to bring the saw back to the market. The practical result is that SawStop has been the predominant flesh-detection table saw widely available in the United States, which is itself part of the design-defect and feasibility story.
One World Technologies recalled about 21,500 Ryobi RTS20 ten-inch portable table saws sold at Home Depot. The Consumer Product Safety Commission announced the recall, number 11-066, on December 14, 2010. The blade on the motor carriage could be misaligned, posing a laceration hazard.
A recall on your model is powerful evidence but is not required to bring a claim. Most table saw amputation claims proceed on a design-defect theory whether or not a recall exists for that model.
Florida adopted strict products liability in West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 1976), following the Restatement (Second) of Torts section 402A. A manufacturer can be liable for a product that is defective and unreasonably dangerous, without proof that the manufacturer was careless.
The lead theory in a table saw amputation case is design defect. The plaintiff argues the saw was unreasonably dangerous because it lacked flesh-detection braking, an adequate riving knife, or a usable guard, and that a feasible safer alternative existed at the time of sale. Florida applies both the consumer-expectations test and the risk-utility test to design-defect claims.
The feasible safer alternative is the heart of the case. SawStop began selling flesh-detection saws in 2004. The technology works. The hazard, finger and hand amputation, is severe and permanent. A jury weighs the cost of adding the safety system against the cost of the injuries it prevents.
A failure-to-warn claim argues the manufacturer did not adequately warn of the amputation risk or instruct on safe use, riving-knife installation, and guard use. A negligence claim argues the manufacturer failed to use reasonable care in design or testing. Negligence carries a two-year deadline under section 95.11(5)(a), Florida Statutes, so the product-liability count under section 95.11(3)(d) is usually the broader path.
Comparative fault applies. Under section 768.81, Florida Statutes, a claimant found more than 50 percent at fault for his own harm recovers nothing after the 2023 amendment. Manufacturers routinely argue the user removed a guard or ignored a warning. The flesh-detection argument blunts this, because the whole point of the technology is to prevent the injury even when the user makes a mistake.
The product-liability deadline is the one that governs most table saw amputation cases. It is four years under section 95.11(3)(d), Florida Statutes. The clock generally runs from the date of injury, though Florida applies a delayed-discovery rule in limited circumstances.
A general negligence count carries a two-year deadline under section 95.11(5)(a), Florida Statutes, after the 2023 reforms. If a table saw injury causes death, the wrongful-death deadline is two years under section 95.11(5)(e), Florida Statutes. Section 95.11 was renumbered after House Bill 837, effective March 24, 2023, and a 2024 amendment, so prior citations to subsection (4) for these limitations periods are outdated.
A separate clock can end your case regardless of the deadlines above. The statute of repose under section 95.031(2)(b), Florida Statutes, bars a product-liability action brought more than 12 years after the product was delivered to its first purchaser. Table saws last for decades. If your saw is old, the repose period can extinguish the claim outright, which is one reason to evaluate the case promptly.
For an injury that happened in Southeast Georgia, Georgia law applies its own clocks. Strict product liability sits in OCGA section 51-1-11, with a 10-year statute of repose. The personal-injury deadline is two years under OCGA section 9-3-33.
The saw is the case. Do not discard it, do not repair it, and do not let an employer, a landlord, or an insurer take it. The exact model, the presence or absence of a riving knife, the condition of the guard, and the blade-height setting are all read directly from the machine.
Photograph the saw from every angle before anything is touched. Keep the manual, the box, the receipt, and any registration or warranty paperwork, because those establish the model, the date of first sale, and the repose clock. Keep the cut workpiece if you still have it.
Identify where the saw came from. A saw issued by an employer, supplied on a job site, or rented from a store creates additional defendants and additional preservation duties. Send a written preservation demand quickly so the saw is not altered or destroyed.
The manufacturer is the central defendant. For Ryobi-branded saws that is often One World Technologies, Inc. Other saws trace to Robert Bosch Tool Corporation, Stanley Black and Decker for DeWalt, Emerson or TTI entities for Ridgid, and Chervon for Skil. The correct corporate entity is established from the model and date of manufacture.
The retailer and the distributor can also be liable in the chain of distribution. Many of the litigated saws were sold at Home Depot. A rental company, a staffing agency, or an employer that supplied the saw may have separate exposure depending on the facts and on workers-compensation rules.
The CPSC has documented the table saw hazard for years. The agency published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking in October 2011 and a supplemental proposed rule on November 1, 2023, that would have limited a blade cut to no more than 3.5 millimeters against a test probe approaching at one meter per second. The CPSC withdrew that proposed rule in 2025. The regulatory record is useful to show the manufacturers were on long notice of the hazard and of the available fix.
I treat the saw itself as the most important witness. Before anyone talks settlement, I want the machine secured and photographed, the model confirmed, and the date of first sale pinned down so the repose clock under section 95.031(2)(b) is understood from day one.
I build the case around the feasible safer alternative. The flesh-detection brake has existed since 2004, it stops the blade in about five milliseconds, and a jury in Osorio found a saw defective for going without it. I pair that with the riving-knife and guard analysis so the design story is complete rather than narrow.
I prepare for the comparative-fault fight early. Manufacturers argue the user removed the guard or set the blade too high. Under section 768.81, Florida Statutes, crossing 51 percent fault ends the case, so the record on how the injury happened has to be careful and honest from the start.
I am Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm. I review these claims directly, and I will tell you plainly if a repose problem or a fault problem makes the case hard. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
If a table saw amputated or cut your fingers in Florida, these first steps protect both your health and your claim. The single most important thing is to preserve the saw.
Possibly. In Osorio v. One World Technologies, Inc., 659 F.3d 81 (1st Cir. 2011), a jury found a Ryobi benchtop saw defectively designed for lacking flesh-detection technology and awarded $1.5 million. Whether you have a claim depends on the model, the date the saw was first sold, how the injury happened, and the Florida deadlines. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
A product-liability injury claim has a four-year deadline under section 95.11(3)(d), Florida Statutes, usually running from the date of injury. A separate 12-year statute of repose under section 95.031(2)(b) can bar a claim on an older saw regardless of when you were hurt.
It can support a design-defect claim. The argument is that flesh-detection braking is a feasible safer alternative that has been sold since 2004 and stops the blade in about five milliseconds, and that selling the saw without it made the saw unreasonably dangerous. A jury weighs the cost of the safety system against the harm it prevents.
Yes. One World Technologies recalled about 21,500 Ryobi RTS20 portable table saws sold at Home Depot. The CPSC announced the recall, number 11-066, on December 14, 2010, because the blade on the motor carriage could be misaligned, posing a laceration hazard. A recall is helpful evidence but is not required to bring a design-defect claim.
SawStop sued Bosch for patent infringement at the U.S. International Trade Commission. The ITC found infringement and issued an exclusion and cease-and-desist order that took effect on March 27, 2017. Bosch and SawStop later settled, and although the settlement permits Bosch to sell the REAXX in the United States, Bosch has chosen not to bring it back to the market. The result is that SawStop has been the predominant flesh-detection saw widely sold here.
No. The CPSC proposed a rule. It published an advance notice in October 2011 and a supplemental proposed rule on November 1, 2023, that would have limited a blade cut to no more than 3.5 millimeters against a test probe. The CPSC withdrew that proposed rule in 2025, so there is currently no federal mandate.
It matters but it is not automatically fatal. Florida uses modified comparative fault under section 768.81, and a claimant found more than 50 percent at fault recovers nothing. The flesh-detection argument is that the technology prevents amputation even when the user makes a mistake, which is precisely why the saw should have had it.
There is no standard figure, and no lawyer can promise an outcome. Value turns on which fingers were lost, your work and earnings, your medical care, and the strength of the design-defect proof. For context only, the Osorio jury awarded $1.5 million for a severe hand injury on a Ryobi saw. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Yes, under Georgia law. Strict product liability sits in OCGA section 51-1-11 with a 10-year statute of repose, and the personal-injury deadline is two years under OCGA section 9-3-33. The correct state and deadline depend on where the injury occurred.
It matters a great deal. The saw is the central piece of evidence, because the model, the guard, the riving knife, and the date of first sale are read from the machine. If the saw is gone the case is harder, though not always impossible. Preserve the saw, the manual, and the receipt as early as you can.
Free consultation. The phone rings to Graham, not a call center.
Call: 904-383-7448