Articles Tagged with product liability

Published on:

While the majority of auto accident injuries are the result of negligence by one or more motorist involved, crash victims shouldn’t overlook the possibility that a vehicle defect may have been a contributing factor, if not the sole cause.car accident attorney

The auto industry hasn’t garnered a great deal of public trust in recent years, as numerous class action lawsuits have revealed a long-standing pattern within the industry to conceal vehicle defects from unsuspecting members of the public. Last year, as noted by Automotive News, auto makers recalled a record 53.2 million vehicles for defects ranging from seat belt failures to malfunctioning airbags to non-working breaks. These are serious deficits that, even if they don’t cause a crash, may result in one suffering injuries that far worse than they otherwise would have been.

Now, we receive news of the latest reported problem, which involves an alleged defect wherein Chrysler Pacifica vans are shutting off suddenly in mid-travel. The New York Times reports one man in San Francisco was driving at 70 mph down the highway in his brand new van when the vehicle shut off without warning. As she explained, “It just died.” In the middle of a congested highway, the van slowed to a crawl with no power steering or electrical power. The driver edged his way over as far to the right as he could, trying desperately to get to the shoulder with what little juice was left as vehicles whizzed by. He was barely missed by a semi-truck that laid on the horn and was forced to swerve.  Continue reading →

Published on:

We trust the vehicles in which we rely on daily to be properly tested for safety. Unfortunately, too many auto manufacturers and makers of auto parts fail to adequately test these machines. When they fail or there is a vehicle defect, the consequences can be catastrophic personal injuries. car accident lawyer

Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit reinstated a $1 million jury verdict in favor of a car accident victim rendered quadriplegic after his seat belt failed to prevent his head from striking the roof of the vehicle in a rollover crash. These types of product liability cases should be explored anytime someone is in

According to court records, the crash occurred five years ago when plaintiff driving a van collided with a boat that was being towed by another vehicle. At the time, plaintiff was driving his two sons and eight other people on a return trip to St. Louis following a Boy Scout camping trip in Minnesota. The initial impact of the crash didn’t cause significant damage. However, the van plaintiff was driving swerved and rolled at a relatively low-speed. Plaintiff was wearing his seat belt, but still slid far enough out of the seat for his head to connect with the roof of his van, dislocating his neck and severing his spinal cord. Nobody else in the vehicle was seriously hurt.  Continue reading →

Published on:

Comparative negligence is the legal theory that a plaintiff is at least partially to blame for his/ her own injuries. In some states, that fact alone can prohibit a person from collecting any damages whatsoever (pure contributory negligence). In other states, a plaintiff’s own negligence can’t be more than the negligence of other parties (modified comparative fault). In Florida, which follows a pure comparative negligence standard, any amount of comparative negligence won’t bar the claim, but it will proportionately reduce damages (per F.S. 768.81).car accident

Recently, the South Carolina Supreme Court weighed a case that asked whether the doctrine of comparative negligence applied in a crashworthiness product liability lawsuit against a vehicle manufacturer. That state follows a modified comparative fault model.

Although this is an out-of-state case, it’s worth examining because state supreme courts will often consider the rulings of sister courts in weighing similar circumstances. In this case, the court ruled that comparative negligence does not factor in a crashworthiness case. Further, public policy in that state doesn’t prohibit a plaintiff who was allegedly intoxicated at the time of a crash from bringing a claim of crashworthiness against the manufacturer of the vehicle. Continue reading →

Published on:

The Japanese auto product manufacturer pleaded guilty recently to fraud as part of a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice in which it agreed to pay $1 billion in penalties for concealing an airbag defect that’s been blamed for at least 16 deaths and dozens of injuries.drive

However, this is likely not the end of the story. For one thing, there are pending civil lawsuits in Miami alleging product liability resulting in serious injury and wrongful death.

Additionally, Ford recently issued a safety recall of approximately 32,000 vehicles in the U.S. and Canada to replace defective Takata airbags in newer models. The automaker reported that while it was unsure whether any accidents or injuries were connected to the defect, the issue was certain airbags had been shown not to fully inflate in the event of a crash. In some instances, the airbag even became detached from the wheel.  Continue reading →