Product Liability Law Blog

Wendell Keetch and the family and estate of Bettie Nelson and are suing Chrysler Group, LLC for Texas auto products liability and wrongful death. Nelson, 80, died last February when a 2006 Dodge Durango crashed into the home of Keetch, who sustained life-threatening injuries.

According to police, the SUV, which was driven by Fidel Flores, ran a stop sign and rammed through a brick wall before striking Keetch's home. Per the plaintiffs, they believe "unintended acceleration" caused the Texas auto defect accident. They contend that the automaker either knew or should have known that the Dodge Durango had an auto defect that made it a dangerous vehicle.

Alleged auto defects include a poor fault detection system that could not anticipated unintended acceleration, electromagnetic interference, and short circuiting, defective electronic systems and parts that were at risk of malfunctioning, and lack of a brake override/fail-safe device to stop/prevent sudden acceleration (even though other manufacturers had used an alternate design that could do this). The plaintiffs believe that Chrysler was negligent in the manufacture, design, sale, and marketing of the 2006 Durango and that this negligence was a proximate cause of the deadly Texas accident. Negligence allegedly included failure to properly test the vehicle and failure to do enough to protect users and vehicle occupants. The surviving family members and Keetch say that Chrysler either knew or should have known that the vehicle was defective.

The Texas defective auto part lawsuit seeks damages for Nelson's terror, mental anguish, and physical pain prior to her death, as well as burial and funeral costs. Damages are also being sought on behalf of Janith Glazner, who is Nelson's daughter. Glazner is claiming loss of companionship, consortium, and inheritance, and mental anguish. Her brother, James Richard Nelson, is seeking similar damages. Keetch, who sustained permanent and severe injuries is seeking damages for future and past necessary and reasonable medical bills, his physical impairments and mental pain, and the diminishment of his ability to enjoy life.

Meantime, the authorities recently said that they would not charge Flores, because there was not enough evidence indicating whether the driver or an auto defect caused the deadly crash. He, too, also died from the injuries he sustained in the car accident.

When seeking damages for auto products liability against a car manufacturer, you want to work with an auto defects law firm that has the experience, resources, and knowledge to successfully pursue your recovery. Going up against an automaker can be tough and you want to make sure that you retain someone that won't be intimidated by this fact and has a record of success.

Read the Complaint (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Parents File Texas Auto Products Liability Lawsuit Against General Motors Over Teenager's SUV Rollover Injuries, Product Liability Law Blog, September 7, 2011

Texas Playground Accident Lawsuit Seeks Damages from McDonald's Chain Owners, Product Liability Law Blog, July 29, 2011

Texas Auto Products Liability: Air Bag Defect Lawsuit Seeks Damages from GM, Product Liability Law Blog, May 10, 2011

A California 15-passenger van accident lawsuit against Ford Motor Co. is being fought out in civil court. The six plaintiffs are seeking auto products liability compensation over a 2004 van accident.

The vehicle, a Ford Econoline E350,was part of a caravan of church kids and their chaperones when tread separation impacted one of its tires. This caused the van driver Bill Brownell to lose control of the van, which then rolled over several times after he overcorrected. Brownell and passenger Tony Mauro were thrown from the vehicle and died.

Now, the victims that survived the California 15-passenger van accident want Ford to pay. They contend that the automaker knew the van was dangerous but failed to notify customers.

The jury is going to have to assess whether buckled seat belts and a driver tutorial could have saved the lives of Brownell and Mauro, who weren't wearing safety belts at the time. They will also have to decide whether Ford should have told car dealers that the Goodyear tire was prone to separation and had been recalled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2008.

The plaintiffs have already reached confidential settlements with the other defendants: Fair Oaks Presbyterian Church, Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (over the tire defect), Sears, which sold the tire, and Suburban Ford, which was responsible for servicing the van.

Ford has been the target of hundreds of 15-passenger van lawsuits over its Econoline van. It was just last year that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration put out another advisory warning that if not properly operated and maintained, this Ford van is at high risk of rolling over and crashing. The government cautioned that the vehicle's tires must be kept properly inflated and look out for signs of wear and tear. The NHTSA also noted that unbalanced or improper loading of the vehicle increases the chances of a rollover crash. The federal safety agency said that only drivers trained to operate a 15-passenger van should drive this one.

15-Passenger Van Accidents
15-passenger vans are more prone to rollover crashes than most other autos. Although the vans are designed to carry 15 passengers and the luggage that can accompany so many occupants, studies show that the more people who get in the vehicle, even without exceeding the passenger limit, the greater the chance that it will roll as the center gravity moves toward the back, dramatically impacting the degree of control the driver is able to have when trying to avoid an accident.

You want to work with an experienced auto products liability law firm that understands the design flaws inherent in 15-passenger vans and knows how to prove they contributed to causing the personal injury or death. Going after a big automaker on your own can be tough, which is why it is important that you retain the services of a 15-passenger van lawyer that has the resources, experience, and ability to protect you and fight for your right to recovery.

Lawsuit continues in fatal crash of big church, Sacramento Bee, October 12, 2011

15-Passenger Van Safety, Public Citizen

NHTSA

More Blog Posts:
$32.2M Goodyear Tire Blowout Verdict Upheld by the Nevada Supreme Court in Deadly 2004 Utah 15-Passenger Van Crash--Again, Product Liability Law Blog, January 10, 2011

15-Passenger Van Lawsuit Filed Against Chrysler and R & J Tire Company Over Woman's Wrongful Death, Product Liability Law Blog, October 27, 2010

California Rollover Lawsuits: Ford Ordered to Pay Paralyzed Musician $18 Million and Jaguar Land Rover Must Pay Former Field Hockey Player $21.1 Million, Product Liability Law Blog, June 18, 2009

A woman whose trailer home caught on fire when her neighbor's Ford F-150 pickup caught fire is suing the automaker for Illinois automotive products liability. Guadalupe Mendez lost her home on September 12, 2006. At the time, the trailer house, which she had bought four years before, was nearly paid off. Losing her house left her and her two sounds, then 13 and 9, with a car and the clothes on their back.

In her Illinois auto defect lawsuit, Mendez Is accusing Ford of knowing that there was something wrong with the switch for the truck's cruise control system but doing nothing to remedy the problem. Mendez's believes that this auto defect is what started the fire.

Mendez is not the first person to file an auto products liability complaint against Ford over this safety issue. Similar auto defect lawsuits have been filed in Texas, Michigan, and San Francisco. Also a defendant in Mendez's complaint is Texas Instruments, which manufactured the switch.

Per Mendez's Illinois auto defect complaint, the fire, which gutted the Ford F-150, likely occurred because of a defect in the cruise control system that allows electrical current to run through the switch even when the vehicle isn't on. Also, even though only one-half amp of power is required by the system, it is constantly getting 15 amps of power, which can cause it to overheat and a fire to start up in parked pickups.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has recalled about 17.5 million Ford autos in the last 12 years for issues linked to the faulty control system. However, the NHTSA believes that there still may be several million vehicles with this auto defect that are currently in use. Many Ford owners may not be aware their vehicle has this safety issue--especially if they bought their autos second-hand.

A car fire can be incredibly dangerous for the occupants in a vehicle and those in the area at the time. A motor vehicle that catches fire is at serious risk of exploding--especially when the gas tank is involved. This can lead to not just the destruction of the vehicle but to serious burn injuries and even deaths.

The Ford F-150 is not the only Ford vehicle that has been linked to faulty cruise control systems. Other Ford autos that have been recalled:

• Excursion ('00 and '03 models)
• Mazda-B-Series ('98-'02 models)
• Navigator ('98-'02 models)
• Expedition ('97 to '02 models)
• Windstar ('95-'03 models)
• Mountaineer ('95-02' models)
• Explorer Sport and Sport Trac ('01-'02 models)
• Explorer (95'-02 models)
• Ranger (''95 - 03 models)
• Mercury Capri ('94 models)
• F53 Motorhome ('94-'02 models)
• Bronco ('93-'96 models)
• Mark VIII ('93-'98 models)
• Taurus SHO ('93-'95 models)
• F Series (>8500GVW Diesel) ('93-'97, '99-'03 models)
• Blackwood ('02-'03 models)
• Lightning ('03-'04 models)
• F Series (150-550) ('93-'03 models)
• Crown Victory/Grand Marquis/Town Car ('92-'98 models)
• E Series (Econolines) ('92-93 models)

Auto manufacturers can be held liable for auto defects that cause serious personal injuries or wrongful deaths. You want to work with an experienced auto products liability law firm that has the resources, knowledge, and team to help you recover the damages that you are owed.

Lawsuit: Defect in Ford's cruise control burned down Aurora home, The Beacon-News/Chicago Sun-Times, September 22, 2011

NHTSA Repeats Caution to Owners of Various Recalled Ford Vehicles on Fire Risk, NHTSA, October 21, 2010

Center for Auto Safety

More Blog Posts:
Ford and Chrysler Among Latest Automakers to Recall Vehicles, Product Liability Law Blog, January 3, 2011

Ford Recall and GM Chevrolet Fire Incidents Rekindle Fire Hazard Concerns,
Product Liability Law Blog, February 13, 2011

Auto Defects: California Assembly Approves Bill that Would Bar Rental Car Companies from Selling or Renting Out Recalled Vehicles Until They Are Repaired, Product Liability Law Blog, April 28, 2011

The parents of a teenage girl are suing General Motor for her Texas SUV rollover accident injuries. The teen and other students were riding a Chevrolet Suburban in 2007 when the teacher, who was driving the vehicle, lost control of the sport utility vehicle, which then rolled over.

Even though she was properly restrained, Rachel and Matt Blalock's daughter was thrown from the SUV. Another teenager who was also ejected from the vehicle (police reports say she wasn't wearing a seat belt), died.

In their Texas auto products liability complaint, the Blalocks claim that the SUV did not provide adequate restraint or sufficient occupant protection from rollover accident. They also believe that the Chevy Suburban, which they contend was dangerous and defective, lacked the adequate safeguards to prevent ejection. They are accusing General Motors of failing conduct adequate engineering analysis or testing.

The Blalocks are seeking damages for their daughter's mental trauma, emotional distress, pain and suffering, disfigurement, impairment, medical costs, loss of earning capacity, loss of consortium, and other damages.

SUV Rollover Lawsuits
If you or someone you love was injured in an SUV rollover crash, the sooner you retain the services of an experienced auto products liability law firm that knows how to pursue your recovery, the better. There is a lot of evidence that will need to be gathered and preserved, as well as many questions that witnesses, accident reconstructionists, other experts, police, doctors, and others will have to answer.

Unfortunately, there are auto defects and deficiencies can result in the failure to protect occupants during a rollover crash. Motor vehicle manufactures know this and it is their job to make sure that they do everything possible so that passengers aren't seriously injured or killed. Proper seat belt protection and roofs that are solid enough that they won't result in collapse (known as "roof crush"), and advanced window glazing to protect occupants during impact, are among the safety features that can be implemented.

Ejection Mitigation
Studies show that occupants that aren't ejected from an auto during a collision have a higher survival rate. Fortunately, beginning in 2013, car manufacturers will have to start installing "ejection mitigation" systems in all motor vehicles. All new autos will have to include this feature by 2018. This means better side air bags and window glazing. Also per the new NHTSA-issued rule, motor vehicles weighing less than 10,000 lbs will have to establish a countermeasure that would stop unbelted adults from being able to go 4 inches beyond the opening of a side window during a collision. NHTSA says about 476 serious injuries and 373 deaths could be prevented every year with these new safety measures.

Lawsuit against GM filed over deadly Suburban rollover, Southeast Texas Record, August 15, 2011

U.S. Department of Transportation Issues New Ejection Mitigation Rule, NHTSA, January 13, 2011

Related Web Resources:
NHTSA on Ejection Mitigation (PDF)

TOP SAFETY PICKS 2011, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

More Blog Posts:
Parents File Massachusetts $7M SUV Rollover Lawsuit Against Mitsubishi Motors Over Teenager's 2009 Wrongful Death, Product Liability Law Blog, April 20, 2011

US DOT Issues Rule to Reduce Vehicle Ejections During Rollover Accidents, Product Liability Law Blog, February 4, 2011

Ford SUV Rollover Lawsuit: Jury Awards Baseball Player's Family $131 Million, Product Liability Law Blog, September 27, 2011

A jury has awarded a woman $24.7 million for the California seat back collapse lawsuit she filed against seat manufacturer Johnsons Controls. Jaklin Romine became a paraplegic following the 2006 rear-end car crash. Romine, who is paralyzed from the chest down, says she will use the money to pay for full-time care, a vehicle she can drive on her own, and school.

The catastrophic auto accident occurred on October 21, 2006 when Romine was stopped at an intersection. When the rear-end crash happened, the driver's seat she was using broke and fell backwards, which caused her body to push backward below her seat belt. Her head then hit the back of the rear passenger seat.

During her California auto products liability trial, Jaklin's legal team argued that the car seat was so weak that it couldn't withstand the impact from a crash, which involved speeds as low as 30-mph. They accused the manufacturer of placing front vehicle occupants at serious risk of spinal cord injury, head injuries, and vehicle ejection.

Seatback Collapse
Seat back failure is a potentially fatal auto defect. Seatback collapses are most likely to happen in rear-end crashes when a car seat was made with inadequate seat strength or is faulty in other ways fails. When a vehicle is struck from the rear, its seats should be strong enough to stay upright and keep the occupants in place even as the force of impact moves the car forward and then jolts the passengers backwards. Unfortunately, this isn't always what happens and when seatback failure does occur, the driver can lose control of the auto, occupants may be ejected partially or completely from the vehicle or tossed around inside the auto, those riding in the rear seat can be fatally crushed or killed in a front seat collapse, or the collapsed seats may end up blocking the car doors or windows and eliminating all exits.

Unfortunately, current safety standards for car seats are not tough enough and they have not been updated in more than 3 decades. Car seats only have to pass a strength requirement and despite their known failure rate during National Highway Traffic Safety Administration impact tests, they are not subject to a crash test rating.

That said, regardless of what the current auto seat standard is, it is the responsibility of automakers and seat manufacturers to make sure that their car seats are not weak and prone to failure during an auto accident.

LA Woman Awarded $24M after Crash Collapses Her Car Seat, My Fox LA, April 18, 2011

New study supports case for stronger seats, The Safety Record, July 2, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Hyundai Ordered to Pay $1.8 Million Auto Products Liability Verdict for Teenager's Wrongful Death Caused by Poorly Designed Car Seat, Product Liability Law Blog, May 15, 2010

Ford Motor Co. and Woman Paralyzed in SUV Accident Involving Rear Seat Latch Failure Reach Auto Products Liability Settlement, Product Liability Law Blog, January 11, 2010

Seat Belt Syndrome: Child Safety Continues to Take a Back Seat, Product Liability Law Blog, November 14, 2009

Continue reading "$24.7M California Auto Products Liability Judgment Awarded in Seatback Collapse that Left Woman a Paraplegic" »

Earlier this year, our auto products liability law firm wrote about efforts by the California Assembly to prevent Hertz, Enterprise, Avis, and other car rental companies from selling or renting motor vehicles that had been recalled unless the necessary repairs were already made. The bill was introduced after Raechel and Jacqueline Houck died in a car crash because their PT cruiser rental had a power steering defect that increased the risk of an engine fire occurring. Raechel, 24, lost control of the vehicle, which then collided with a semi-truck on the 101 Freeway and burst into flames. A jury later awarded the family $15 million in their auto products liability lawsuit against Enterprise.

The bill, AB753, passed the General Assembly and will be voted on by the California senate. Meantime, this safety issue involving car rental companies and recalled vehicles has gone national.

Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) recently introduced in the US Senate the "Raechel and Jacqueline Houck Safe Rental Car Act of 2011," which also bars unrepaired, recalled vehicles from being rented or sold to consumers. If this legislation passes, state attorneys general and the Federal Trade Commission would enforce the provisions.

Both bills would close a loophole that currently lets vehicle rental companies rent or sell unrepaired recalled vehicles without breaking any laws--unlike auto dealers who cannot sell a recalled vehicle unless the safety issue has been fixed. Also, under Schumer's new measure, the NHTSA would have to execute two studies.

One study would look into claims that there are auto rental companies that are purposely ordering new vehicles without certain safety features, such as side air bags. Buyers and renters were reportedly not notified that these types of orders were made. The other study would look at rental companies' sales practices between when the NHTSA announces an auto recall and when the company is officially notified that a recall was issued. Right now, there are more than 1.6 million rental cars available for use in the US.

Meantime, the car rental industry is fighting these lawmakers' measures. Opponents of the bills say that incidents of recalled autos being rented out before the safety issue is fixed are "infrequent" and that some auto defects are not serious enough to require their immediate repair.

Considering that even a seemingly minor safety issue can cause a catastrophic car crash, this perspective is surprising. One need only look at the number of people who die every year because a vehicle malfunctioned or a safety defect either caused a collision or failed to protect the vehicle occupant during a crash.

SCHUMER INTRODUCES BILL THAT WOULD BAN RENTAL CAR COMPANIES FROM RENTING RECALLED VEHICLES TO CONSUMERS, Schumer.Senate.Gov, July 28, 2011

Car rental companies: Driven to danger, Los Angeles Times, August 10, 2011

Related Web Resources:
RAECHEL AND JACQUELINE HOUCK SAFE RENTAL CAR ACT OF 2011, GPO.com

NHTSA

More Blog Posts:
Auto Defects: California Assembly Approves Bill that Would Bar Rental Car Companies from Selling or Renting Out Recalled Vehicles Until They Are Repaired, Product Liability Law Blog, April 28, 2011

New York Tire Blowout: 2 Killed in Tour Bus Crash Carrying Indian Tourists, Product Liability Law Blog, July 27, 2011

Wrongful Death Trial Over Utah Toyota Sudden Acceleration Lawsuit is Scheduled for 2013, Product Liability Law Blog, June 17, 2011

Continue reading "Fight to Stop Rental Companies From Selling or Renting Vehicles with Auto Defects Goes National" »