A corded blind killed or brain injured your child in seconds. The cordless version of that same product already existed. We pursue the manufacturer in Florida and South Georgia. Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm.
Call 904-383-7448Reviewed by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., Florida Bar No. 39104, Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm. Last updated .
Window blind cords strangle about nine children under five years old every year in the United States, and a child died in roughly 48 percent of the more than 200 cord incidents the CPSC studied from 2009 through 2021. The danger is a defective design. A corded blind, Roman shade, or roller shade that hangs a loop of cord within a toddler's reach is dangerous when a cordless version of that exact product already exists and costs little more. In Florida, a strict product liability claim follows West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 1976), which adopted Restatement (Second) of Torts section 402A. The deadlines are short. A wrongful death claim must be filed within 2 years under section 95.11(5)(e), Florida Statutes, and a survival or injury claim for an anoxic brain injury within 4 years under section 95.11(3)(d), Florida Statutes. Graham W. Syfert, Esq., is Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm and handles these cases in Northeast Florida and South Georgia. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Here is the prayer for relief first. If a corded window blind, Roman shade, or roller shade strangled your child, you may have a product liability claim against the company that made it. The claim does not require proof that anyone was careless. It requires proof that the product was defective and that the defect caused the harm. A cord loop within a toddler's reach is a defect when a cordless version of the same product already exists.
The numbers are grim and they come from the federal government. On average, about nine children under five years of age die every year from strangling in window blinds, shades, draperies, and other window coverings with cords. The Consumer Product Safety Commission studied more than 200 cord incidents involving children eight and under from January 2009 through December 2021. A child died in 48 percent of those incidents. An NBC News investigation counted at least 440 child strangulation deaths on window covering cords since 1973, and later CPSC data pushed that total to at least 456.
The child is the person to root for in this story. The toddler was put down for a nap. A loop of cord hung beside the crib. In the time it takes an adult to answer a phone, the cord wrapped a small neck and cut off air. Some of these children die. Others survive with an anoxic brain injury, which means the brain went without oxygen long enough to cause permanent damage. Those children need lifelong care that costs more than most families will ever have.
Graham W. Syfert, Esq., is Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm. He is licensed in Florida and Georgia and handles product liability and wrongful death claims in Jacksonville, Northeast Florida, and South Georgia. This page tells you how the injury happens, which products and brands have been recalled, what the law requires, and what to do first.
A young child cannot free herself from a cord. A toddler lacks the strength and the coordination to pull a loop back over her head once it tightens. The windpipe of a small child closes under far less force than an adult's. Strangulation can happen in less than a minute and it is often silent, so a parent nearby hears nothing until it is too late.
The most familiar hazard is the long outer cord that raises and lowers a blind. A child near a window can reach the dangling cord, form a loop, and slip it over her head. Cribs, beds, sofas, and changing tables placed near a window put the cord within reach. The federal voluntary standard now treats any accessible operating cord longer than eight inches as a strangulation hazard.
Continuous loop cords, the closed loops common on vertical blinds and some roller shades, are especially dangerous. The loop is already formed. A child does not have to make one. A continuous loop that is not anchored tightly to the wall or floor leaves a ready noose at a child's height.
Roman shades hide a separate danger. The inner cords that run up the back of the fabric can be pulled out into a loop. A child can place her neck between the exposed inner cord and the fabric on the back of the shade. The CPSC has documented multiple deaths in Roman shades from this exact mechanism.
Roll up blinds carry their own defect. Strangulation occurs when the lifting loop slides off the side of the blind and a child's neck becomes entangled on the free standing loop, or when a child places her neck between the lifting loop and the blind material. These two failure modes drove the historic 2009 recall described below.
A product is defective when a safer alternative design exists and is feasible. Cordless lift systems, motorized systems, wand controls, and cords made permanently inaccessible were all available and affordable long before many of these blinds were sold. The manufacturer chose the cord. That choice is the heart of the case.
The window covering industry writes its own voluntary safety standard, ANSI/WCMA A100.1. The 2018 version took effect on December 15, 2018, and required that stock products, meaning the off the shelf blinds sold in stores and online that make up most of the market, be cordless, have inaccessible cords, or use short cords no longer than eight inches. The 2022 update, ANSI/WCMA A100.1-2022, extended cordless and inaccessible cord requirements to custom made products as well.
The federal picture is more complicated and you should understand it before anyone tells you the cord was legal. In November 2022 the CPSC issued a mandatory rule, 16 CFR part 1260, requiring operating cords on custom window coverings to meet the same standard as stock products. The CPSC also added hazardous window covering cords to its substantial product hazard list. The custom rule carried an effective date of May 30, 2023.
The custom rule did not survive. On September 12, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated it in Window Covering Manufacturers Association v. CPSC, 82 F.4th 1273. The court found that the agency breached notice and comment requirements, leaned on flawed data in its cost benefit analysis, and chose an arbitrary effective date. The rule was sent back to the agency.
None of this excuses a manufacturer in a civil case. A voluntary standard violation is evidence of a defect. The substantial product hazard listing for window covering cords remains a CPSC enforcement tool, and the recalls below show the agency still pulls noncompliant corded blinds from the market. A product can be defective and dangerous even when no mandatory federal rule covers it. Compliance with a weak voluntary standard is a defense the manufacturer raises, not a wall that stops the claim.
Recalls matter for two reasons. They prove the manufacturer and the CPSC agree the product is dangerous, and they often establish that the cord violated the federal window covering rule. The recalls below were all verified against CPSC and SaferProducts.gov records during the preparation of this page. If you own one of these products, stop using it and follow the recall remedy. If one of these products injured a child, save it exactly as it is and call a lawyer before you cut anything.
The CPSC recalled about 133,000 Persilux brand zebra blinds on September 25, 2025. The blinds were sold on Amazon from June 2023 through June 2025 for between 40 and 124 dollars. The CPSC found the recalled blinds have long operating cords that can cause death or serious injury to children due to strangulation and entanglement hazards, and that the blinds violate the federal rule for window coverings. The remedy is a free repair kit with a replacement cord wand.
About 3,800 Allesin blackout roller window shades were recalled on February 27, 2025. They were sold on Amazon from September 2023 through September 2024 for between 29 and 58 dollars. The CPSC cited long operating cords that can cause strangulation and entanglement and a violation of the federal window covering regulations. The remedy was a full refund after the consumer cut and photographed the cord.
Shadeks LLC of Bensalem, Pennsylvania, recalled about 15,500 ShadesU roller window shades on February 20, 2025. The shades were sold on Amazon from June 2024 through September 2024. The CPSC found long operating cords that pose strangulation and entanglement hazards. The remedy converts the shades to a cordless design at no cost with free return shipping.
The CPSC recalled about 16,300 LINKCOO blackout roller window shades on March 27, 2025 (Recall 25-198), sold on Amazon from December 2022 through September 2024. It recalled about 4,900 Homebox blackout roller window shades on February 20, 2025 (Recall 25-147), made by Zhejiang Mingjing Textile Co. and sold on Amazon from December 2022 through September 2024. And it recalled about 545 LuckupShein roll up window shades on April 24, 2025 (Recall 25-233), sold on SHEIN from May 2023 through December 2024. Each recall cited long operating cords creating strangulation and entanglement hazards in violation of the federal window covering rule.
The pattern is decades old. In December 2009 the CPSC and the Window Covering Safety Council announced a recall to repair every Roman shade and roll up blind on the market, affecting an estimated 50 million units. The agency had reports of five deaths and 16 near strangulations in Roman shades since 2006 and three deaths in roll up blinds since 2001. The industry has known about this hazard for a very long time.
Florida recognizes strict product liability. The Florida Supreme Court adopted Restatement (Second) of Torts section 402A in West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 1976). Under that theory, a manufacturer is liable for a product that reaches the user in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous, without any need to prove negligence. A cord loop within a child's reach, when a cordless design exists, fits a design defect claim.
A design defect claim asks whether the product could have been made reasonably safer. The answer for corded blinds is yes. Cordless lift, motorized lift, wand tilt, and cords made permanently inaccessible were all feasible. Proving the safer alternative design is the core of the case, and the manufacturer's own cordless product line is often the best evidence that the safer design was available.
Manufacturers have long sold cord cleats and tension devices and called them a fix. A warning or a retrofit device that depends on the consumer to install it correctly every time does not cure a dangerous design. A failure to warn claim addresses both the absence of an adequate warning and the false comfort of a flimsy retrofit. In Florida, a claim founded on negligence carries a 2 year deadline under section 95.11(5)(a), Florida Statutes.
The manufacturer will argue the parent should have moved the crib or installed the cleat. Florida uses modified comparative fault under section 768.81, Florida Statutes. After House Bill 837, which took effect on March 24, 2023, a plaintiff found more than 50 percent at fault recovers nothing. The defect, not the grieving parent, is the cause that the evidence should keep in focus.
These cases often involve death, so lead with the shortest clock. A Florida wrongful death claim must be filed within 2 years under section 95.11(5)(e), Florida Statutes. The 2 years generally run from the date of death. Do not assume you have years to decide. Evidence disappears, the product gets thrown away, and witnesses move.
If the child survives with an anoxic brain injury, the timing differs. A claim founded on the design, manufacture, distribution, or sale of personal property carries a 4 year limitation under section 95.11(3)(d), Florida Statutes. A general negligence claim carries 2 years under section 95.11(5)(a), Florida Statutes. The correct deadline depends on whether the child died and on how the claim is framed, so this is a decision to make with a lawyer, not alone.
A separate bar can end the claim before the limitations clock even matters. Florida's statute of repose for product liability is 12 years from delivery of the product to its first purchaser, under section 95.031(2)(b), Florida Statutes. Blinds last for decades. A blind installed 13 years before the injury may be barred outright. This is why the date the blind was bought is one of the first facts we need.
A note on the recent statute renumbering, because the wrong citation is a common error. House Bill 837 renumbered section 95.11. After a later 2024 amendment, subsection (4) is now a 3 year medical debt provision. It is not the negligence, products, or wrongful death subsection. Negligence and wrongful death live in subsection (5). Products liability lives in subsection (3)(d). Anyone citing 95.11(4) for these claims is using the stale, pre 2024 scheme.
Many families in South Georgia shop and live within reach of the Jacksonville market, and Graham W. Syfert, Esq., is licensed in Georgia. Georgia recognizes strict product liability against manufacturers under OCGA section 51-1-11. That statute makes a manufacturer liable in tort, regardless of privity, when the product was not merchantable and reasonably suited to its intended use.
Georgia's deadlines are their own. The personal injury statute of limitations is generally 2 years under OCGA section 9-3-33. Georgia also imposes a 10 year statute of repose, measured from the date of the first sale for use or consumption of the product, in OCGA section 51-1-11. Like Florida's repose period, the Georgia 10 year bar can defeat a claim on an older blind no matter when the injury happened, so the purchase date matters in Georgia too.
The single most important thing you can do is keep the blind. Do not cut the cord. Do not throw it out. Do not let the apartment manager replace it. The blind, the cord, the mounting hardware, and the packaging are the proof. A defense expert will want to inspect the exact unit, and a manufacturer cannot argue the cord was within the standard if the cord is sitting on a lawyer's shelf.
Save the proof of purchase. The receipt, the order confirmation, the Amazon order history, or the box establishes who made the blind, when it was sold, and where. That date drives the statute of repose analysis under section 95.031(2)(b), Florida Statutes, and under OCGA section 51-1-11 in Georgia.
Photograph everything before anyone moves it. Photograph the blind on the window, the cord, the crib or bed nearby, and the room layout. Keep the medical records, the EMS run report, and any death certificate. Identify every witness who was in the home. Each of these pieces helps tell the court a complete story early, the way good writing should.
The manufacturer is the primary defendant. That is the company whose name is on the blind, whether a major brand or a foreign seller operating through Amazon or SHEIN, like the Persilux, Allesin, LINKCOO, Homebox, and LuckupShein sellers named in the 2025 recalls. A foreign manufacturer can be hard to serve and harder to collect from, which makes the rest of the supply chain important.
The retailer and the distributor can also be liable. A seller that placed a defective blind into the stream of commerce can be a defendant, and a large domestic retailer or online marketplace is often more reachable than an overseas factory. Identifying every link in the chain, from factory to importer to seller to installer, is part of the early investigation and another reason to preserve the packaging that names them.
I tell parents the same thing I told attorneys I was training. Start as close to the end as possible. The end of this story is a manufacturer that chose a cord when a cordless design was sitting on the same shelf. Everything else is how we prove that choice.
Keep the blind. I cannot say that enough. I have seen good cases weakened because a well meaning relative cut the cord off after the funeral. The physical product is the case. A photograph helps, but the blind itself is the witness that does not forget and does not move away.
Watch the calendar. A wrongful death claim in Florida is a 2 year clock under section 95.11(5)(e), Florida Statutes, and the repose bar under section 95.031(2)(b) can be even more unforgiving on an older blind. I would rather hear from a family the week of the injury than the month before the deadline.
I am Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm, and I am licensed in Florida and Georgia. I work with families in Jacksonville, Northeast Florida, and South Georgia. I do not promise a result, and no honest lawyer should. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. What I can promise is that I will read the file the way Vonnegut said to write, giving you as much information as soon as possible, so you understand what is going on, where, and why.
If a corded window blind, Roman shade, or roller shade strangled your child, the first hours and days matter. Here is what to do, in order.
Yes, you may have a product liability claim. Florida recognizes strict liability for defective products under West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 1976), which adopted Restatement (Second) of Torts section 402A. You do not have to prove the manufacturer was careless, only that the corded design was defective and caused the harm when a cordless version of the same product already existed. Speak with a lawyer quickly, because the deadlines are short and the blind must be preserved as evidence.
On average, about nine children under five years of age die every year from strangling in window blinds, shades, draperies, and other window coverings with cords, according to the CPSC. The CPSC studied more than 200 cord incidents involving children eight and under from 2009 through 2021, and a child died in 48 percent of them. An NBC News investigation, later updated with CPSC data, counted at least 456 child strangulation deaths on window covering cords since 1973.
Yes. On September 25, 2025, the CPSC recalled about 133,000 Persilux brand zebra blinds sold on Amazon from June 2023 through June 2025, finding that the long operating cords pose strangulation and entanglement hazards in violation of the federal window covering rule (Recall 25-479). A recall does not by itself create a lawsuit, but it is strong evidence that the product was defective. If a Persilux blind injured a child, preserve the blind, do not cut the cord, and consult a lawyer.
A Florida wrongful death claim must be filed within 2 years under section 95.11(5)(e), Florida Statutes. The 2 years generally run from the date of death. If the child survived with an anoxic brain injury, a product liability injury claim carries a 4 year deadline under section 95.11(3)(d), Florida Statutes. A separate 12 year statute of repose under section 95.031(2)(b) can bar a claim on an older blind entirely, so the purchase date matters.
That is a survival and personal injury product liability claim rather than a wrongful death claim. In Florida the injury claim founded on a defective product carries a 4 year limitation under section 95.11(3)(d), Florida Statutes. An anoxic brain injury means the brain went without oxygen long enough to cause lasting damage, and the lifetime care costs can be very large. These damages are part of the claim against the manufacturer of the defective corded shade.
The legal picture is mixed. The voluntary ANSI/WCMA A100.1 standard, effective for stock products since December 15, 2018 and expanded in 2022, requires most blinds to be cordless or have inaccessible cords. The CPSC mandatory custom rule, 16 CFR part 1260, was vacated by the D.C. Circuit on September 12, 2023 in Window Covering Manufacturers Association v. CPSC, 82 F.4th 1273. A corded blind can still be defective and dangerous in a civil case even where no mandatory federal rule applies, and the CPSC continues to recall noncompliant corded blinds.
No. Do not cut the cord, do not throw the blind out, and do not let anyone replace it. The blind, the cord, and the mounting hardware are the most important evidence in the case. A manufacturer cannot argue the cord met the safety standard if the actual product is preserved for inspection. Photograph everything in place, keep the receipt or order history, and call a lawyer before you alter anything.
Possibly. Allesin, LINKCOO, Homebox, and the SHEIN seller LuckupShein all had roller shades recalled in 2025 for strangulation hazards that violated the federal window covering rule. Foreign sellers can be hard to serve and collect from, which is why the claim often reaches the retailer or online marketplace that placed the defective product into the stream of commerce. Identifying every party in the supply chain is part of the early investigation.
Yes. Graham W. Syfert, Esq., is licensed in both Florida and Georgia and is Of Counsel to the Soud Law Firm. In Georgia, strict product liability against a manufacturer is available under OCGA section 51-1-11, the personal injury deadline is generally 2 years under OCGA section 9-3-33, and a 10 year statute of repose under OCGA section 51-1-11 can bar a claim on an older blind.
There is no standard figure, and any lawyer who quotes one is guessing. Value depends on the specific facts, including whether the child died or survived with a brain injury, the lifetime cost of care, and the strength of the design defect proof. Verdicts and settlements in other cases reflect their own facts and do not predict yours. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Free consultation. The phone rings to Graham, not a call center.
Call: 904-383-7448