A New Jersey man filed a personal injury lawsuit recently against a major sporting goods retailer after suffering injuries operating their equipment.

According the suit, filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Robert Samanns of Franklin, New Jersey, was using his Sportcraft treadmill in his home on February 5th, 2013. Samanns claims he was thrown from the machine during normal operation. The lawsuit alleges he suffered significant injuries to his back, head, right shoulder, hip, and neck in the fall.

Samanns endured significant physical pain and suffering, mental pain and suffering, inconvenience, and embarrassment according to the complaint. He also accrued a significant amount of medical expenses owing to his injury and rehabilitation and claims a diminished capacity to earn a full income.

Samanns filed suit against the Philadelphia Sports Authority where he purchased the machine, claiming their negligence in selling a faulty unit puts them squarely at fault for his injuries and resulting medical bills. Samanns is seeking damages in excess of $50,000 from the Colorado-based national sporting goods retailer on three different counts, including breach of warranty and negligence. Additionally, Samanns’ wife is also claiming damages for loss of consortium from her husband.

The complaint alleges Sports Authority associates failed to equip the treadmill with proper safety devices, allowed the sale of a defective machine, failed to inspect the equipment for any possible hazards to the customers, and failed to properly instruct Samanns of possible dangers associated with operation of the treadmill.

Samanns’ complaint asserts his injuries were completely caused by the faulty treadmill, making Sports Authority and the devices manufacturer strictly liable to the plaintiff for their breach of warranty guaranteeing the safety of the device. The treadmill’s manufacturer, Sportcraft, who was named as a defendant in the original case filing, has since gone bankrupt and has been dismissed from all further litigation.

Samanns will now be forced to endure a long and hard-fought court battle. National chains, like Sports Authority, have a vested interest in avoiding liability in defective product claims. Accepting responsibility for the fault would set a precedent that would make future claims against the retailer difficult to fight.

Because of this, Sports Authority will likely try to settle the matter quietly and for a diminished settlement amount. Given the cost of court proceedings coupled with his mounting medical bills, Samanns may feel pressured to accept this lesser amount.

Acquiring PA settlement funding could help someone in Samanns’ position reject a lesser settlement offer and hold out for a greater award. Settlement funding provides cash advances for plaintiffs litigating lawsuits. The money provided by settlement funding is ‘non-recourse’, meaning that it does not have to be repaid in the event of a lost case, and can be spent in anyway the recipient deems appropriate.

Because PA settlement funding is not a traditional loan, factors such as employment history and financial standing, which may keep a plaintiff from securing a personal loan, are not considered. Rather, settlement funding companies are concerned only with the validity of the case and the likelihood of its success.

Once the determination has been made to provide settlement funding, funds can be made available in as little as 24-hours in Pennsylvania (PA). There are no upfront fees required to secure settlement funding. And unlike traditional loans with monthly payments, the borrower is not required to make any payments until the case is settled.

If the plaintiff receives an award, the “lawsuit loan” payment is made at the time of settlement. If the plaintiff loses the case, no repayment is required.

If you or someone you knowing is awaiting judgment in a civil action suit and are feeling the pressure to settle, acquiring settlement funding in PA can go a long way toward helping to realize fair compensation.