Product Liability Law Blog

In San Francisco, California, a federal jury awarded a Bay Area musician $18 million for his auto products liability lawsuit against automaker Ford. 38-year-old resident Dax Pierson is now a quadriplegic because of injuries he sustained in a 2005 15-passenger van rollover accident involving a Ford vehicle.

According to Pierson’s California personal injury complaint, he sustained multiple spinal fractures when the E-350 van he was riding on Interstate 80 in Iowa rolled over 2 ½ times after striking black ice. Pierson, who was seated in the back passenger seat, struck his head on the roof after the seat became detached from the floor. He was using a seat belt. No one else sustained serious injuries during the crash.

During the auto products liability trial, Ford said that the van was not defective and fulfilled all industry requirements. Representatives for the car maker instead blamed the manager of Pierson’s band, Patrick Scott, for driving too fast. The jury, however, disagreed with Ford and awarded Pierson $6 million for pain and suffering and $12.3 million for medical costs.

Pierson founded the band Subtle and was its vocalist, keyboard player, and lead composer and arranger. Now, he uses special equipment that pushes buttons on a computer keyboard to compose and arrange his music. He also needs an attendant with him 24-hours a day.

In another California auto products liability lawsuit, a Los Angeles judge told Jaguar Land Rover that it must pay a now paralyzed man $21.1 million because the Land Rover Discovery SUV he was riding rolled over a number of times after it was struck by a teen driver who was driving at 80mph on the 118 freeway in 2003.

Sukhsagar Pannu, 53, sustained a catastrophic spinal cord injury from the SUV rollover accident. The former field hockey player can no longer utilize his legs and arms and he requires 24-hour care.

The judge says that the vehicle’s high gravity center made it prone to rollover accidents and the SUV’s roof collapsed too easily. Meantime, Jaguar Land Rover says it plans to appeal the verdict. Their lawyer says that the 16-year-old driver is the one that is at fault for causing Pannu’s catastrophic SUV rollover accident.

Paralyzed Oakland musician sues Ford, wins, SF Gate, May 29, 2009
Land Rover maker ordered to pay $21.1 million in rollover case, Los Angeles Times, May 28, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Rollover: The Hidden History of the SUV, PBS.org

15-Passenger Van Safety, NHTSA

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: 15-Passenger Vans , Automotive Product Liability , California , Sport Utility Vehicle Rollovers , States

Bookmark:

According to a federal appeals court, a Utah auto products liability lawsuit over a 2005 15-passenger van rollover accident that killed eight Utah State University students and one instructor and seriously injured two other students can proceed. The 15-passenger van complaint was filed in district court last year—but Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., the remaining defendant in the wrongful death case, had tried to get the case thrown out.

The tire company, which made the tires that were on the van, had expressed concern that certain information needed for the case would have exposed company secrets. The appeals court, however, says the plaintiffs are entitled to know how the tires were manufactured.

The students and their agriculture instructor were coming back to school after visiting a farm during a field trip when the deadly crash happened. The 15-passenger van rolled over a number of times after one of the tires blew out. The plaintiffs’ wrongful death complaint accuses Cooper Tire of knowing that the tire was defective yet failing to remedy the tire's defects.

The families of the victims that died settled their products liability complaint against Chrysler more than a year ago. The plaintiffs had accused the auto manufacturer of making a van with an unsafe gravity center, defective tires, and unsafe seat belts.

15-Passenger Vans
15-passenger vans have long been known for their high rollover risk because of the way they are designed. Last month, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued an advisory warning all 15-passenger van users to exercise the necessary safety precautions to prevent a rollover accident from happening. Recommendations include:

• Check tires for wear and tear, and make sure that they are properly inflated. Tires that are not fully inflated on a 15-passenger van is a common cause of rollover accidents, especially when the van is fully loaded.
• Ensure that everyone in the van is using a seat belt.
• Do not drive the van unless you are properly trained to operate this type of vehicle.

The NHTSA says that 15-passenger vans carrying 10 or more passengers have a rollover risk that is almost three times greater than vans carrying less than 5 passengers. This means that using a 15-passenger van the way that it was intended—to carry 15 passengers—places vehicle occupants at risk of getting injured in a rollover crash.

Cooper Tire told to supply information, UPI.com, June 10, 2009

Appeals court gets USU van lawsuit rolling again, The Salt Lake Tribune, June 6, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Fatalities to Occupants of 15-Passenger Vans, 2003 - 2007 (PDF)

15-Passenger Vans, IIHS

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: 15-Passenger Vans , Automotive Product Liability , Tires , Utah , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Last week, a number of car accident victims and their families traveled to Washington DC to ask lawmakers for help. As injured parties, they want to make sure that they will still receive compensation for their products liability and personal injury claims even though General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Bankruptcy proceedings generally place a temporary freeze on civil lawsuits, and plaintiffs end up becoming one of many unsecured creditors waiting to divide up whatever funds are left after the debts owed to secured creditors are paid off first. For auto products liability victims that were catastrophically injured in a GM or a Chrysler motor vehicle—and currently uninjured motorists that could get hurt in a defective GM or Chrysler car in the future—this outcome could pose a huge financial concern.

About 500 to 1,000 people are seriously injured or killed in auto products liability-related motor vehicle crashes each year. Approximately 300 Americans are currently suing Chrysler for products liability, and some 1,200 others are suing GM.

In New York, consumer groups are appealing the sale of Chrysler to Fiat because the new company isn’t going to be responsible for the old company’s losses, including personal injury settlements and verdicts. Center for Auto Safety Executive Director Clarence Ditlow wants the bankruptcy system or the Obama Administration to make sure that Chrysler and GM products liability victims and their families are taken care of. Meantime, the Center for Justice and Democracy want the two motor vehicle manufacturers to buy retroactive insurance polices that would cover past and future claims.

Among the victims that are fighting to recover the compensation they are owed:

• Couple Joseph and Jeanne Polio were hoping to obtain products liability compensation because Jeanne sustained catastrophic injuries during a 2005 rollover accident involving a Chrysler SUV. She now suffers from a spinal cord injury and is paralyzed from the waist down.

• 37-year-old Mark Noveck, who became a quadriplegic in a GM SUV rollover accident, settled his products liability lawsuit against the auto manufacturer right before the company filed for bankruptcy. His products liability lawyer says the $999,999 settlement was a form of “surrender” because it was better than possibly not getting anything.

Families and Severely-Injured Victims of Defective GM and Chrysler Cars Travel to Washington to Seek Urgent Help, Red Orbit, June 3, 2009

Chrysler bankruptcy stalls couple’s product liability case, NH Register, May 26, 2009

Injured little girl facing uphill fight in lawsuit against reeling GM, Daily News, May 26, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Chrysler Bankruptcy and Product Liability, NY Times, May 20, 2009

GM rescue dumps crash victims, Asiatimes.com, June 9, 2009

Continue reading "General Motors and Chrysler Bankruptcies: Consumer Groups Fight to Ensure Products Liability and Personal Injury Recovery " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

The Obama Administration’s recent unveiling of a new fuel economy and emissions initiative is raising some issues of concern over whether the proposed changes will compromise auto safety. If finalized, the initiative would establish a fuel economy standard of 35.5 mph by 2016. Vehicle categories covered under this joint rulemaking put forth by the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency include sport utility vehicles, passenger cars, pickup trucks, and minivans—autos that account for nearly 60% of greenhouse gas emissions.

In a USA Today article, former Office of Management and Budget rulemaking chief John Graham expressed concern that automakers, already financially strapped, might have to compromise safety in order to meet the initiative’s deadlines and, for example, make smaller, less safe cars. This solution could have huge ramifications on people's lives.

Recent studies conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety showed that bigger and heavier cars still have the advantage over their smaller vehicle counterparts when it comes to protecting vehicle occupants during an auto crash. If safety is compromised in any way, there is concern that this could reverse the decline in the number of motor vehicle deaths that the US has experienced recently. Last year's US traffic death rate is expected to be even lower than 2007's traffic death rate.

White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Director Carol Browner disagrees with these concerns and says that car makers can use new technologies to meet the new fuel standards. Many environmentalists agree with the Obama Administration and say that car makers will merely have to create better vehicle designs and use lighter materials to make their autos.

However, these new approaches could cost more money that currently is in such short supply among even the biggest players in the auto industry that the government has had to provide financial assistance. Just this week, the Obama Administration announced a $7.5 billion bailout to GMAC, which is the auto lender to Chrysler and GMC. This is in addition to the $6 billion that GMAC already received under the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Meantime, the federal government has had to take the costs of auto safety into account. For example, the Bush Administration delayed the release of new federal standards mandating stronger car roofs that can withstand more weight during an auto crash over concern that they would be too expensive for car makers to implement. The tougher roof standards were finally announced last month.

Auto Products Liability
Vehicle occupant safety must remain a primary priority for car makers when they are designing and manufacturing their motor vehicles. If your injuries or your loved one’s death was the result of an auto defect, you should speak with our auto products liability law firm today.

Safety could suffer if we boost mileage by making cars smaller, USA Today, May 20, 2009

Notice of Upcoming Joint Rulemaking to Establish Vehicle GHG Emissions and CAFE Standards, NHTSA, May 19, 2009

New Emissions Changes May Not Be Safe, KIMA TV, May 21, 2009

Another $7.5 billion bailout for GMAC, CNN.com, May 21, 2009

Related Web Resources:
IIHS Crash Tests Reveal that Bigger and Heavier Motor Vehicles Exhibit Greater Occupant Protection During Auto Collisions

Read the Notice of Intent for the Rulemaking, NHTSA (PDF)

Continue reading "Auto Products Liability: Will New Fuel Economy Standard Compromise Vehicle Safety?" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

According to the US Department of Transportation, each year 22,372 serious injuries and 1,652 traffic deaths could be prevented by the use of seat belts, which reportedly saved 15,147 lives in 2007, if seat belt use rates in each use state was at 90%. US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood calls safety belt use the “most effective traffic safety device every invented.”

To show people how serious safety and transportation officials throughout the US are about promoting the use of safety belts, the “Click It or Ticket” campaign will take place this year from May 18 – 31. Over 10,000 police agencies are expected to patrol the streets to catch and cite people that are caught not using seat belts when riding in motor vehicles.

Currently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration National Occupant Protection Use Survey reports that the seat belt use rate for 2008 was 83%. However, one out of every five Americans still does not buckle up.

Teens are an age group of special concern. 2,502 of the 4,540 16-20 year old auto occupant victims that died in 2007 were not using seatbelts. 65% of the teen drivers that died in nighttime car accidents that year were not using seat belts.

Defective Seat Belts
In order for seat belt use to save lives and prevent serious injuries, the safety belt must be free from defects so that it works properly. Unfortunately, seat belt defects do occur and car makers have been known to recall vehicles because of defective safety belts. Also, injury victims and the surviving families of those who have died because a seat belt malfunctioned or had a defect have sought products liability and wrongful death recovery from the negligent manufacturers.

Recently, a woman who became paralyzed in a 2006 Colorado rollover accident was awarded a $4.23 million seatbelt defect judgment against Ford Co. Erica Hoffman’s auto products liability lawsuit contended that the seat belt was faulty and that it came unlatched during the auto accident.

A Colorado jury awarded Hoffman $18 million, assigning 25% of the liability to Ford. She also settled with TRW Automotive Safety Systems Inc, the company that made the seat belt, as well as the driver of the 1999 Ford Mercury Cougar Coupe that was involved in her rollover accident.

Car makers and seat belt manufacturers must be held liable for negligence when they make and install safety belts that are defective. Vehicle occupants rely on safety belts to keep them secure in the event of a motor vehicle crash. A seat belt that doesn’t work properly can cause a vehicle occupant to hit his or her head against the windows or roof of a car. He or she can also get thrown out of the vehicle. A person whose seat belt unlatches during an auto accident could end up with a traumatic brain injury, a spinal cord injury, or massive internal injuries that might otherwise have been prevented.

New Study: Higher Seat Belt Use Could Save Many Lives, NHTSA, May 14, 2009

Woman wins $4.23 million from Ford in lawsuit, Examiner.com, May 1, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Click it or Ticket, NHTSA

Seat Belt Use in 2008 - Use Rates in the States and Territories (PDF)

Continue reading "Nationwide “Click It or Ticket” Campaign A Reminder of How Seat Belts—When Defect-Free—Can Save Lives" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Colorado , Defective Seatbelt and Restraint System Cases , Seat Belts , States

Bookmark:

A California family is suing Toyota for wrongful death. The Benson family contends that the car manufacturer failed to properly notify them that the steering relay rod in their motor vehicle was defective and, as a result, their 18-month-old toddler died in an auto crash.

The deadly California car accident occurred on Christmas Eve in 1997 when the steering relay rod, which connects the two wheels, broke and Cindi Benson lost control of the vehicle. The Toyota went off the road and hit a tree. Lilian Benson died from her injuries on Christmas day. Her siblings, Frank Benson, then 4, and Laquita Benson, then 7, sustained injuries.

This is not the first auto products liability lawsuit to be filed against Toyota over a defective steering relay rod. Earlier this year, the parents of Levi Stewart sued the car maker for failing to issue a recall in the 90’s over the faulty auto part. A recall was eventually issued the following decade but only at first in Japan.

Stewart, 18, died on September 15, 2007 when the steering relay rod of his Toyota pickup truck broke and he lost control of the vehicle. Friends who were in the truck with him sustained serious injuries. Stewart's father, Mike Stewart, did not receive a notice from Toyota that the 1991 truck may have contained a defective part until three month's after his son's death.

Toyota issued its recall of the defective steering relay rod in the US in 2005. A letter sent that year by Toyota’s North American subsidiary to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration noted that there could be 977,839 motor vehicles affected by the defective auto part, including the:

• Toyota 4Runner, 1989 to 1995 models
• Toyota Truck, 1989 to 1995 models
• Toyota T100, 1993 to 1998 models

The Benson family’s California wrongful death attorney says that only about 30% of the cars had been repaired a year and a half after the recall was announced and not everyone was properly notified about the recall. Usually, a repair of approximately 70% of the vehicles that are part of a recall is considered the pass/fail rate.

Other auto products liability lawsuits have been filed by families in Louisiana and Kentucky.

Humboldt family says faulty Toyota car part resulted in baby's death, Times-Standard, May 11, 2009

Idaho family sues after son dies in recalled Toyota, KTVB, March 26, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Auto Recalls, Justia

Toyota

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , California , Idaho , Kentucky , Louisiana , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

To increase occupant protection during rollover accidents, The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is instituting new roof safety standards for light vehicles and heavier vehicles that will result in dramatically stronger vehicle roof structures. Under the new standard, light vehicles weighing up to 6,000 pounds will have to withstand a force of three times the vehicle’s weight. This is a significant increase from the current standard that requires a vehicle to withstand 1.5 times the vehicle weight applied to one side of the roof. Heavier vehicles, weighing from 6,000 to 10,000 pounds, will now have an actual roof safety standards they will have to meet. Their roofs will have to withstand a force equivalent to 1.5 times the vehicle’s weight. The phase-in period will start in September 2012 and must be completed for all vehicles within these weight ranges by the 2017 model year.

While this new standard should increase passenger protection during rollover crashes, the NHTSA is quick to point out that strengthening vehicles’ roofs is only one solution to preventing rollover deaths. About 10,000 people are killed in the US each year in rollover crashes, and roof strength was a factor in only 667 of those deaths. The NHTSA estimates that the new roof safety standards will prevent another 135 rollover fatalities from occurring each year.

There are other safety measures that auto makers can implement to prevent rollover accidents. The NHTSA says electronic stability control (ESC) can reduce rollover deaths by anywhere from 4,200 to 5,500 fatalities each year. Safety belts is another effective countermeasure that the NHTSA says saves lives during rollover crashes—reducing deaths by 80% in light trucks and 74% in passenger cars. According to studies, an ejected vehicle occupant has a three times greater chance of dying than a vehicle occupant who manages to stay in the vehicle during an auto accident. Use of seat belts is one way to keep occupants securely fastened in their vehicles.

It is up to vehicle manufacturers to make sure that they meet federal safety standards and that they install safety device that are free from defects and in proper working condition in the autos that they sell. When failure to make vehicles and auto parts that are free from defects results in personal injury or wrongful death, the auto maker and other liable parties may be held liable for products liability.

Proving negligence in a rollover accident can be tough—especially in rollover collisions involving just one vehicle. This is why you need to work with rollover accident attorneys who have the experience, skills, and resources to successfully pursue your financial recovery.

U.S. DOT Doubles Roof Strength Standard for Light Vehicles, NHTSA, April 30, 2009

Read the Final Rule (PDF)

Related Web Resources:
Roof Strength and Injury Risk, IIHS (PDF)

Safercar.gov

Continue reading "Federal Government Improves Rollover Protection by Doubling New Roof Safety Standard for Light Vehicles and Introducing Standards for Heavier Autos " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Sport Utility Vehicle Rollovers

Bookmark:

Government investigators and bus safety advocates want the federal government to come up with stronger safety regulations for the US commercial bus industry. The call came at a National Transportation Safety Board hearing this week when investigators announced that speeding was the cause of a deadly 2008 bus accident in Utah.

At the hearing, federal investigators said speeding and driver fatigue were the likely causes of the deadly January 6, 2008 bus crash that occurred in the Utah town of Mexican Hat in the Four Corners area. The bus driver, age 71, was probably driving somewhere between 88 and 92 miles per hour and experiencing altitude sickness along with a head cold when the deadly crash happened. He also may have been suffering from sleep apnea. The bus, which was transporting 56 people who had been on a Colorado ski trip, moved toward the guardrail before falling off an embankment. The roof of the bus was sheared off and the majority of the passengers were ejected from the vehicle. 9 people died, while 43 others sustained injuries, some of which were severe.

The investigators chastised the National Highway Traffic Safety Adminsitration for its failure to execute safety recommendations from 1999 when the NTSB called for stronger motor coach roofs—a safey measure that could have saved the lives of people killed in the Utah crash. The NTSB had also recommended seat belts and windows that are easy-to-open that could have prevented certain catastrophic injuries and saved many lives over the past 10 years. Now investigators are saying that it's time to make these necessary changes as well as improve its medical oversight of bus drivers who may be suffering from certain health issues, such as sleep apnea.

Another way to improve bus safety is to implement stability-control technology that could decrease the number of rollover bus accidents—the leading cause of bus accident deaths. Safety advocates also point out that making bus owners comply with tougher safety regulations would make bus travel a lot safer.

Cheaper bus prices, more convenient bus connections, and a troubled airline industry has resulted in more people traveling on buses. Some 750 million bus passengers travel in over 34,000 commercial buses in the US and Canada annually.

Motor Coach Bus Accident Facts
Between 2000 and 2007, there were over 57,000 motor coach crashes that claimed the lives of 401 people. In the past eight months alone, there have been catastrophic rollover bus accidents in California, Arizona, and Missouri that have killed 25 people. About 30 to 50 people die in US bus collisions every year.

Any kind of motor vehicle defect is a dangerous defect and one that can cause injuries and deaths. It is the obligation of commercial bus manufacturers to make sure that there are no defects or deficiencies in the design of a bus that could allow for serious injuries or deaths to occur. Federal and state safety departments must also make sure that they have safety regulations that force bus makers to comply with stricter safety standards.

If you have been injured in a bus accident caused by driver negligence, you may have grounds for a personal injury lawsuit. You also may have grounds for a products liability lawsuit if deficient design or a defective bus part was a contributing factor in causing the bus accident.

Bus Safety Rules Are Long Overdue, Board Says, Washington Post, April 22, 2009

Bus Crash Hearing Brings Calls for Stronger Safety Regulation, PeterGreenberg.com, April 22, 2009

Related Web Resources:
National Transportation Safety Board

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Continue reading "Bus Safety Advocates Call For Better Federal Safety Regulations to Minimize Injuries and Deaths on Commercial Buses" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Arizona , Automotive Product Liability , California , Colorado , Missouri , Utah

Bookmark:

The Consumer Product Safety Commission and Yamaha Motor Corp USA have announced a “free repair” program of approximately 120,000 off-highway recreational vehicles. This program refers to the the Rhino 660 , the Rhino 700, and the Rhino 450. The purpose of this free repair service is to make some modifications to the all-terrain vehicles to minimize the chances of a rollover accident happening.

While some media sources are calling this repair program a recall, Yamaha has been quick to say that this is not an official recall. Either way, there have been over 50 incidents resulting in 46 fatalities to both drivers and passengers, as well as hundreds of injuries, since the vehicles were first distributed in 2003.

Over 2/3rds of the accidents involved rollover crashes. The CPSC says that many of the rollover accidents took place when the driver was turning the two-passenger vehicles on level ground and moving at a slow speed. In certain cases, the rider who was injured or killed may not have been using a safety belt.

Although the off-road vehicles are supposed to be driven only by people 16 years of age or older that have actual driver’s licenses, some of the deaths involved younger people who were either riding or operating the vehicles against the manufacturer’s recommendation.

The repairs are intended to improve handling, better contain the riders’ limbs within the vehicles, and reduce rollover accidents. A rear wheel spacer will be installed and a rear-anti-sway bar will be taken off. Yamaha vehicles that have yet to be sold will also be repaired.

Injuries related to these Yamahas have been known to be severe. One girl lost her arm in an ATV accident two years ago when she was on a Rhino. Other Rhino-related injuries have included crushed bones, broken bones, damaged muscles, and death.

The Yamaha Rhino is a cross between a utility vehicle and a smaller ATV. Its design seems to cause a number of stability issues. It doesn’t help that this vehicle doesn’t have to adhere to the safety standards that typical ATV’s have to abide by because it comes with a steering wheel and not handle bars.

Although consumers must listen to manufacturer warnings and operate their all-terrain vehicle as intended, it is also the responsibility of the off-road vehicle manufacturer to make sure that their vehicles are designed in a manner that is free from any inherent defects that could cause injury or death.

To date, there have been approximately 200 personal injury lawsuits filed against Yamaha, which maintains that many of the injuries and deaths occurred because of improper operation and the failure to use safety equipment. Yamaha has, however, settled some of the products liability lawsuits against it.

Yamaha Motor Corp. Offers Free Repair For 450, 660, and 700 Model Rhino Vehicles, CPSC, March 31, 2009

Off-road vehicles recalled after 46 deaths, Los Angeles Times, March 31, 2009

Yamaha off-road vehicles linked to deaths-US govt, Reuters, March 31, 2009

Continue reading "Yamaha Motor Corp USA Calls Back 120,000 Off-Road Vehicles Following 46 Fatalities for Free Repairs to Prevent Rollover Accidents" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has unveiled its new roof strength rating system for motor vehicles. The IIHS says that out of the 12 small SUV’s that were tested, only four of them earned a “good” rating, which is the highest rating possible.

The roof strength test pushes a metal plate against one side of the roof at a regular speed, and before getting crushed five inches, the roof must have withstood a force that is four times more than the weight of the vehicle. To earn an acceptable rating, the SUV must exhibit a minimum strength-to-weight ration of 3.25, which is also influenced by the vehicle weight and the engine size. SUVs with roofs that performed well on the Institute’s test have roofs that are at least 2.5 times stronger than the federal government’s minimum roof strength safety standard.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s current roof safety standard, established in 1973, calls for passenger vehicles to be able to withstand during a rollover crash a force that is 1.5 greater than the motor vehicle’s weight. Although the federal government is pushing to have the strength-to-weight ratio upgraded to 2.5 and to have this standard apply to vehicles with a gross weight of more than 6,000 (which would include the larger SUV’s and pickup trucks), the Institute is pushing for even tougher standards.

IHS Roof Strength Test Results:
Volkswagen Tiguan – ranked first among vehicles that earned a “good” vehicle roof rating.
Jeep Patriot – Good
Subaru Foster – Good
Honda Element – Good
Mistubishi Outlander – Acceptable
Suzuki Grand Vitara – Acceptable
Toyota RAV4 – Acceptable
Chevrolet Equinox – Acceptable
Nissan Rouge – Acceptable
Ford Escape – Marginal
Honda CRV – Marginal
Kia – Poor

The Institute says the roof strength rating system will hopefully make it even easier for buyers to choose the safest motor vehicles. The roof strength rating system will also play a role in the selection of IIHS’s 2010 Top Safety Picks.

While SUV roofs are now designed so that they are stronger than those that were made a few years back, there are still over 10,000 people a year that are killed in rollover accidents. 25% of all passenger occupant fatalities involved minivans or cars rolling over, with SUV’s considered highly susceptible to rollover accidents.

A rollover accident will frequently damage a vehicle’s roof, crushing or deforming it and causing serious injury to vehicle occupants. This is why the stronger the roof, the greater the protection for those inside the motor vehicle. Auto manufacturers can no longer afford to make vehicles with roofs that are poorly designed or constructed.

Roof strength is focus of new rating system; 4 of 12 small SUVs evaluated earn top marks, IIHS.org, March 24, 2009

Roof Strength Another Step In Auto Safety, CNBC.com, March 24, 2009

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations, NHTSA.gov

Roof Strength and Injury Risk in Rollover Crashes of Passenger Cars and SUVs (PDF)

Continue reading "Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Presents New Roof Strength Rating System for Autos" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Roof Crush

Bookmark:

According to Forbes magazine, financial troubles don’t seem to be stopping automakers, including giant vehicle manufacturers General Motors and Ford Motor Co., from making unsafe motor vehicles. This month, the media giant issued its list of the 16 “Most Dangerous Vehicles of 2009.”

The list was compiled using results from tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. While the NHTSA issued up to 5-star ratings for rollover safety, the IIHS ranked vehicles based on the trauma that could result during frontal and side crashes. The 16 vehicles on the list, made up of small trucks, mid-sized sedans, trucks, wagons, and crossovers, scored the lowest number of compiled points.

<

Forbes’ 2009 Most Dangerous Motor Vehicle List:

1) Chevrolet Colorado
2) Chevrolet Aveo
3) Chevrolet Trailblazer
4) Chrysler PT Cruiser
5) Dodge Nitro
6) Ford Ranger
7) GMC Envoy
8) GMC Canyon
9) Hummer H3
10) Hyandai Accent
11) Jeep Liberty
12) Jeep Wrangler
13) Sukuki Equator
14) Nissan Frontier
15) Mazda B Series
16) Kia Rio

The Kia Rio sedan, the Chevrolet Trailblazer SUV, and the Ford Ranger pickup scored the lowest points.

While Forbes is is quick to caution that just because a motor vehicle made the 2009 list doesn’t mean that a consumer shouldn’t buy the vehicle, the media giant says that it is very important for consumers to be aware of which areas of safety each vehicle failed to perform well in. Forbes also recommends that buyers know whether their vehicle comes with rear head restraints, standard side-curtain airbags, and electronic stability control. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says that ESC decreases the chances of passenger rollovers by 64%, single-car collisions by 26%, and single crash SUV rollovers by 85%.

Regardless of the poor financial climate and their decreased funds, auto manufacturers are responsible for making sure that they make and sell motor vehicles that are safe for use. When failure to provide a car, SUV, or truck with proper frontal or side protection or the manufacture of defective air bags, seat belts, or other auto parts results in serious injuries or deaths, the automaker can be held liable with an auto product liability claim or a wrongful death lawsuit.

Most Dangerous Vehicles Of 2009, Forbes.com, February 6, 2009

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

Related Web Resources:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Car Reviews and Ratings, Consumer Reports

Continue reading "Forbes Compiles Its 2009 Most Dangerous Motor Vehicle List " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

Auto manufacturers are responsible for implementing the design and manufacturing precautions necessary to minimize the chances that their vehicles will become involved in a rollover accident. In the event a rollover accident does occur, then vehicle makers must make sure that the structure of the auto can withstand the crash and that there are safety precautions in place to prevent vehicle occupants from suffering serious injuries. Rollover accident victims and their families may be entitled to products liability or wrongful death compensation if a car maker could have done more during the design or manufacture of the vehicle to minimize the seriousness of future injuries.

Last month, the family of TV anchorwoman Polly Gonzalez filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Ford Motor Co. The plaintiffs contend that not only did the seat she was sitting on fail to work correctly, but the roof of the Ford Explorer was not sturdy enough to survive a rollover accident. Gonzales’s two children were also injured in the motor vehicle crash.

In an unrelated lawsuit, a man who became a paraplegic after his 2005 Chevrolet Colorado rolled over is suing General Motors Corporation and Davis-Barr Chevrolet Pontiac, Inc. for his spinal cord injuries. In his automotive products liability lawsuit, the man claims that the seat belt and seat of his vehicle malfunctioned. He also contends that General Motors Corp. failed to provide him with the standard of care and duty he was owed when the company failed to exercise reasonable care in the design, manufacture, testing, marketing, and sales of the vehicle he was riding in, as well as neglected to provide appropriate warnings.

Another man, who is now a quadriplegic, is suing Volkwagen for his personal injury from a 2002 auto accident. Owen Milne is seeking an unspecified amount of compensation for products liability and personal injury because the 1999 Jetta he was a passenger in flipped over as his then fiancé, Rebecca Beisswenger, swerved the car to avoid crashing into a vehicle that passed them on a curve in a no-passing zone.

Beisswenger lost control of the car, which rolled over a number of times down an embankment and back onto the highway. The support beams that were supposed to hold up the roof of the Jetta’s passenger side collapsed. Milne suffered a vertebrae fracture and his neck became compressed. The seat belt he was wearing failed to keep him securely in his seat. Mline’s personal injury lawsuit claims the 1999 Volkwagen Jetta was defectively designed and not capable of keeping its structural integrity during a rollover crash.

South Burlington man sues VW alleging Jettas are unsafe, BurlingtonFreePress.com, January 18, 2009

Lawsuit Filed in Arkansas Roll Over Accident That Left Man Paraplegic, The Open Press, January 24, 2009

Family of Vegas TV anchor suing Ford over crash, Mercury News, January 25, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Rollover, SaferCar.gov

Rollover Information and Prevention, Consumers Union

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Roof Crush , Seat Belts , Sport Utility Vehicle Rollovers

Bookmark:

Auto manufacturer Chrysler and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are recalling 20,283 Dodge Charger and Magnum police cars. The 2006 to 2009 models come with a police package that includes a column shifter. The recall affects vehicles made before and after the recall package refresh.

The concern is that the wrong gearshift position might be displayed if the gearshift cable gets disengaged from the steering column mounting bracket. If this occurs, the police car might move without the driver intending it to and lead to a motor vehicle crash.

So far, there have been no injuries or accidents related to this particular gear defect. However, the recall comes after 55 field reports of problems and 9 customer complaints involving the 2007 Magnum and Dodge Charger police cars. For example, in Maryland, the Montgomery County Police Department filed a report that a Chrysler vehicle might look like it was in “park” gear when it was actually in “drive” mode.”

To remedy this latest defect, Chrysler auto dealers will install a redundant locking mechanism to ensure proper retention and shift linkage function.

Gear Defects
When a driver thinks that the gear of a motor vehicle is in “park” mode and the car suddenly drives forward or reverses itself, other motorists or pedestrians can get hurt. Over the years, there have been a number of motor vehicle accidents that have led to personal injury or wrongful death cases because of park transmission defects in other Chrysler vehicles. School kids and young children are especially susceptible to serious injury if the car that they are walking in front or behind of that they think is parked suddenly accelerates unintentionally or kicks into reverse.

While motor vehicle crashes do occur because of negligent driving, many auto accidents happen because of manufacturing defects. It is important to hold an auto manufacturer liable if an auto defect is the cause of someone’s injury or death.

Chrysler Recalls 20,000 Dodge Police Cars,The Boston Channel, November 11, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Chrysler

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Continue reading "Chrysler and NHTSA Announce Recall of 20,283 Dodge Police Vehicles Because of Gearshift Defect" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has announced its "final rule" on improving school bus safety. Only new buses are subject to the rule, which goes into effect in 2011.

The new rule requires new school buses to have 24-inch-high seat backs that will hopefully prevent heavier and taller kids from being thrown over their seats during a school bus crash so that they don’t injure themselves or the children riding in front of them. Also, all new school buses must now include seats with safety latches that can be removed or flipped without the use of special tools.

New Seat Belt Requirements
While smaller school buses (weighing under 5 tons) will be required to install lap and shoulder belts in all their seats, large school buses still won’t be required to come with seat belts—even though studies indicate that 1,900 injuries a year could be prevented if seat belts were installed in large school buses.

US Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters pointed out that installing seat belts in large school buses will limit how many kids could ride in the vehicles, forcing students to walk or ride in cars to school—two methods of travel that (statistically) are not considered as safe as riding in school buses. Instead, federal safety regulators are providing new criteria for installing safety belts in large school buses and leaving the discretion of whether seat belts should be installed in these buses in the hands of state and local governments.

School Bus Defects
There are 474,000 school buses in the United States. Unfortunately, there are school bus manufacturers that continue to act negligently when designing and making these motor vehicles. School bus defects, such as poorly designed handrails that can easily catch a child’s clothes or school bag straps as he or she exits or enters the bus, defective brakes, faulty tires, and defective seats, have led to school bus recalls.

When a catastrophic bus accident occurs because a school bus or one of its parts was poorly designed or made and kids on the bus or others on the road are seriously injured or killed, the school bus manufacturer and/or any other responsible parties must be held liable for products liability.

New Federal Rule to Make School Buses Safer, Allow Districts to Use Federal Funds to Pay for Seat Belt Installations, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters Announces, NHTSA, October 15, 2008

Related Web Resources:
Read the Final Rule on School Buses, NHTSA (PDF)

Recalls

Continue reading "NHTSA School Bus Safety Ruling Calls for Higher Seat Backs and Introduces New Seat Belt Requirements" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has begun its own preliminary probe into over one million Ford trucks and cars following reports that faulty tire valve stems were causing tires to leak air. Ford Motor Company, which conducted its own investigation, says that the tire valve stems do not pose a safety risk. Safety advocates, however, claim that the potential danger of sudden tire air loss should mandate a recall. In a letter to NHTSA, auto safety researcher Sean Kane, who called for the investigation into Ford’s tire valve stems, warned that drivers and tire repair shops would be unlikely to notice the defects.

The NHTSA’s investigation involves 1,050,000 2007 Ford vehicles, including the Ford F-150, Edge, Mustang, Milan, Fusion, MKZ, Mercury Grand Marquis, MKX, Explorer, Expedition, Escape, and Focus. The agency says that they have 37 complaints involving Ford motor vehicles with faulty valve stems.

23 complaints involved autos with more than one defective tire valve stem. 11 reports involved cases where an air leak caused tire damage. A valve stem is supposed to keep the air in a tire. Topseal Automotive, a subsidiary of Chinese company Shanghai Baolong, made the valve stems that are under investigation.

In May, the NHTSA began another investigation into 23 million Shanghai Baolong Automotive Corp. replacement valve stems that were made in 2006. The agency found 4,767 complaints involving these replacement stems. One complaint reported a deadly auto accident involving a 1998 Ford Explorer that experienced tire failure.

Last month, the NHTSA upgraded that probe into what it calls “Engineering Analysis.” This means that if the analysis investigation finds that the replacement valve stems, imported by Dill Air Controls Products, are defective, some 23.5 million replacement tire valves that were installed between August 2006 and July 2007 may be recalled.

Topseal Automotive told NHTSA that the replacement valve stems lacked proper protection from ozone damage, which can cause the stem bases to crack after 8 to 14 months of use and lead to air loss, tire failure or tire blowouts. Topseal supplies eight million tire valve stems each month to Ford and other car manufacturers around the world.

Ford spokesperson Wes Sherwood maintains that even though they purchased the valve stems from Topseal, the stems they use on their cars and trucks are not made from the same material that the replacement valve stems are made with. Sherwood also says that the valve stems used on Ford vehicles are made with different equipment.

Tire blowouts can lead to serious injury accidents, including vehicle rollovers, multi-vehicle collisions, and accidents involving pedestrians. You may be entitled to compensation from an auto manufacturer or tire maker if you were injured in a motor vehicle accident involving a defective tire.

Feds probe Ford tire leaks, Detroit Free Press, October 22, 2008

NHTSA steps up investigation of tire valves … but not enough, Consumer Reports, October 3, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Shanghai Baolong Automotive Corporation

Ford Motor Company

Continue reading "Federal Auto Safety Regulators Investigate More Than One Million Ford Cars and Trucks for Tire Leaks" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Tires

Bookmark:

US Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters says that more people than ever before are using safety belts. According to the latest National Highway Traffic Safety Administration figures:

• 83% of vehicle occupants are wearing seat belts during daytime hours this year, compared to 82% in 2007.
• The NHTSA says that an additional 270 lives are saved for every 1% increase in seat belt use.
• 84% of car occupants are using safety belts.
• Pickup truck riders are buckling up 74% of the time.
• 86% of SUV and van riders are using seat belts.
• In 2008, safety belt use on freeways is at 90%, compared to 89% in 2007.

The NHTSA attributes the increase in seat belt use to high profile local, state, and national enforcement efforts, such as “Click It or Ticket” Campaign.

Dangers of Defective Seat Belts
Seat belt use can decrease injuries and save lives. According the NHTSA and the US Department of Transportation, 15,383 lives were saved in 2006 because of safety belt use. However, seat belts can only save lives as long as they are not defective or improperly designed.

Seat belts are supposed to keep an occupant securely in his or her seat in the event of a traffic collision. A defective or poorly designed seat belt, however, can fail to prevent a person from being thrown into the windshield or ejected from the vehicle during a serious crash and may cause additional injuries. In the event of a vehicle rollover, a person using a defective seat belt may be even more prone to catastrophic injuries.

It is the responsibility of auto manufacturers to make sure that the seat belts in their vehicles are working correctly. Unfortunately, some motor vehicle makers have been slow to admit there is a problem with a vehicle once it is out in the marketplace. For more information about defective seat belts, please visit the Seat Belt and Restraint System Defects section of our Web site for more information.

Seat Belt use Hits Record Level in 2008, DOT.gov, September 17, 2008

Seat Belt Use Report (PDF)

Related Web Resources:

Click It Or Ticket, NHTSA

Seat Belt Injuries Could Signal More Serious Trauma In Children, ScienceDaily, August 10, 2007

Continue reading "As Safety Belt Use Increases, So Does The Need to Eliminate Seat Belt Defects " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Seat Belts

Bookmark:

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has finished its count of 2007 crash fatalities in the United States, and the news is good. Traffic deaths are down nearly 4%. Injuries also declined, by over 3%. We still have a long way to go. Over 41,000 people died on the nation’s highways –3,000 more than a capacity crowd at Boston’s Fenway Park. Nearly 2.5 million were injured, more than the total attendance of all the games at Denver’s Coor’s Field all season.

The news was particularly bright for passenger cars, which saw a fatality decline of 7.8% and injury decline of 6.5%. The news was less good for light trucks (pickups and SUVs), which lagged with a 2.7% fatality decline and 1.9% injury decline. The news was atrocious for motorcycles which bucked the trend, with a 6.6% increase in fatalities, breaking the 5,000 deaths mark, and a whopping 17% increase in injuries, 15,000 more than the year before, shooting above the 100,000 mark. We are troubled and puzzled by the increased risk to motorcyclists, and will watch with interest for any explanations.

Many factors contributed to the overall safety increase. One likely contributor is the greater availability of cars with Electronic Stability Control – the safety system that helps motorists avoid loss of control by selectively braking or controlling power to individual wheels when a skid is detected. This system is predicted to dramatically decrease the number of accidents as it becomes included in more and more cars. We would not buy a new car without Electronic Stability Control, which is now widely available on a variety of vehicles in every price range. We strongly disapprove of manufacturers that offer ESC only as an extra-cost option. When that happens, dealers tend to not order the vehicles. When ESC is included as standard equipment, as it is in most Honda vehicles for instance, costs can be kept low for the consumer, and the accident danger to all of us is reduced. Other product improvements including elimination of lap-only belts in newer cars, greater availability of side curtain airbags, and more rollover resistant SUV, also likely contributed to the progress in crash injury prevention.

Driver factors also certainly played a role, including strong enforcement of drunk driving laws and graduated drivers licenses that have dramatically improved teen driver accident, death, and injury rates.

One other factor that has certainly contributed to lower death and injury rates: product improvements and safety demand from consumers resulting from product liability lawsuits and the awareness of dangers that they create.

We should applaud our progress as a nation in reducing the toll of the highway crash epidemic, but given the magnitude of the harm – over 41,000 families losing loved ones, and 2.5 million Americans suffering injuries each year – we need to continue to push for greater safety both vehicle design and driver behavior.

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has cautioned motorists that hot summer weather, defective tires, and motor vehicles overloaded with vacationers and cargo make up a deadly combination that can lead to serious auto accidents on US roads and freeways.

One reason the summer heat can create an additional hazard to motor vehicle tires—especially those that are poorly maintained and/or defective—is that the hot weather adds to the temperature buildup of the tire, which can cause the glue that holds it together to stop working until the tire falls apart. Dry air and the sun’s ultraviolet rays have also been known to drastically shorten an already under-inflated or cracked tire’s lifespan.

When a tire blows out and the driver is unable regain control of the vehicle, the car can end up taking a sharp turn or rollover that can result in serious injuries for the motorist and others. The NHTSA says that some 660 people are killed and 33,000 others are injured every year in traffic collisions caused by tire problems. The federal agency also estimates that at least 50 lives could be saved each year and up to 10,600 injuries prevented if steps were taken to properly maintain all tires and keep defective ones off US roads.

There are preventive steps that a motorist can take to properly maintain their tires during the hot summer months:

• Check the tire pressure every month and before going an a long trip.
• Check tires for excessive wear or sidewall deterioration.
• Make sure the tires are properly aligned.
• Rotate your motor vehicle's tires every 3,000-4,000 miles.

Common Causes of Tire Blowouts Include:

• Manufacturing or design defects
• Shredded tires
• Poor tire construction
• Adhesion failures

Unfortunately, tire defects are not uncommon, and some of the biggest tire manufacturers in the world, including Dunlop and Firestone, have recalled defective tires at some point in time. If your injuries occurred in an auto accident involving a defective tire, our auto products liability law firm can help you determine whether you have grounds to file a claim against the tire designer or the motor vehicle manufacturer.

NHTSA Urges Drivers To Check Their Tires During The Hot Weather, NHTSA, August 13, 2007

Desert heat boosts peril of tire blowouts, AZCentral.com, June 18, 2005

Tire Safety, NHTSA

Related Web Resources:

NHTSA

Recalls

Continue reading "Odds of Motor Vehicle Accidents Occurring Due to Tire Blowouts Increase With Rising Summer Heat" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Tires

Bookmark:

There is growing concern that there may be millions of motor vehicles with defective tire valve stems that are currently being driven on US roads. Concern over the hazards associated with defective tire valve stems caught the media spotlight last year, when a Florida man died after the valve stem in one of his tires cracked, causing a rollover crash.

The valve stem believed to have triggered his motor vehicle crash was linked to distributor Dill Air Control Products. The company has since then issued a warning to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that up to 30 million valve stems made by a Shanghai Baolong Industries subsidiary may be out in the US market.

The tire valve stem is the tiny device that keeps the air in a tire. The worry is that the defective tire valve stems could crack prematurely, which could cause the tires to lose air. The loss of tire pressure can then cause the tires to become damaged or underinflated, which may lead to motor vehicle crashes involving serious injuries or deaths.

In June, Tech International, another US parts distributor, announced its voluntary recall of some six million valve stems, also made in China by the same distributor. While only 8,600 of the 6 million recalled stems are believed to be defective, no one knows which motor vehicles were fitted with the defective valve stems.

Safety advocates are encouraging drivers to inspect their valve stems and check the pressure on their tires—especially if they received a replacement tire after July 2006.

If you or someone you love suffered serious injuries in a motor vehicle crash caused by a defective auto part, our experienced auto products liability law firm would like to talk to you.

Fatal Rollover Prompts Probe into Chinese-Made Tire Valve Stems Safety, Reuters.com, June 12, 2008

Tech International Recall, NHTSA

WCBV: Hidden Tire Defect Poses Safety Threat, ABC News, June 24, 2008

Related Web Resources:
Dill Air Controls

Tech International

Procedure to Inspect Snap-In Valve for Cracks, Safety Research.net/Dill Air Controls

Continue reading " Millions of Motor Vehicles in the US Could Have Tires Fitted With Defective Tire Valve Stems" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

At a June 4 hearing before the US Senate, auto safety regulators said they need more time to make sure that adding more headroom and weight to vehicle roofs will not increase the chances of a vehicle rollover. At the center of discussions was the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s proposal to update its roof safety standards.

The higher gravity center of pick-up trucks and SUVs is what make these kinds of vehicles more likely to rollover. The NHTSA's current standard, established in 1973, requires that passenger cars withstand a force 1.5 times the vehicle’s weight during a rollover accident. The 2005 proposal would increase that standard to 2.5 times the vehicle weight. Critics, however, believe this is still not enough to increase passenger safety in a rollover crash, and they have been pushing for an even tougher standard—which is why, in January, the NHTSA said it would consider revising its proposal.

Although by law, the NHTSA has until July 1 to revise its roof standard, lawmakers want the update delayed until regulators arrive at the “correct” standard. Some safety advocates, however, say that there is no concrete evidence to indicate that strengthening current roof standards would significantly minimize the number of injuries and deaths in rollover crashes. Rollover deaths make up 25% of all traffic accident fatalities in the United States, and there were over 10,000 rollover deaths in 2007.

The NHTSA proposal also wants to make automakers exempt from state products liability lawsuits if the vehicles involved in the auto accidents met the new roof safety standards. This would prevent injury passengers from being able to sue for compensation for medical costs, lost income, recovery costs, and other damages.

Our defective auto products law firm represents products liability clients that were injured in rollover accidents and other motor vehicle crashes that occurred because a motor vehicle or one of its auto parts was defective. We have helped injury victims all over the United States recover personal injury compensation.

U.S. Lawmakers Question Regulators on Vehicle Roof Strength Rules, Insurance Journal, June 5, 2008

Roof Crush Standard Flawed, Preempts State Efforts, OMBWatch.org, June 10, 2008

Related Web Resources:

IIHS testifies on the relationship of roof strength and injury risk in rollover crashes (PDF)

NHTSA 2005 Roof Crush Proposal

Continue reading "Auto Regulators May Need More Time to Develop Tougher Roof Strength Regulations" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Roof Crush , Sport Utility Vehicle Rollovers

Bookmark:

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is warning 15-passenger van users to drive safely this summer. New research shows that the number of deadly 15-passenger van rollovers increases between June through August, with 31% of all 15-passenger van rollover accidents occurring during this busy travel period.

While the number of 15-passenger van deaths continues to decline, too many accident fatalities and injuries that are still happening. 58 people died in 15-passenger van accidents in 2006. Just this year, in British Columbia, 8 people died when a 15-passenger van fishtailed and ran into a large truck.

While driver inexperience, driver negligence, and improper maintenance can lead to 15-passenger van accidents, another major problem is the way the 15-passenger vans are designed. The more occupants riding in a 15-passenger van, the more prone it is to becoming involved in a rollover crash because its gravity center moves back and up.

This makes the 15-passenger van harder to control during an emergency situation and means that even if the van is used as intended and designed, with no more than 15 passengers riding the van, occupants are at risk of serious injury or death in the event of a rollover accident or a collision with another motor vehicle.

Placing cargo on top of a 15-passenger van can also increase the risks of a rollover. The NHTSA also has found that 15-passenger vans are more likely to be involved in a single-auto rollover collision than other motor vehicles.

15-passenger van accidents and rollovers can lead to serious injuries, including spinal cord injuries, traumatic brain injuries, head injuries, neck injuries, and death. While the US federal government has banned school districts from using 15-passenger vans, there are still many 15-passenger vans driving on US roads.

Our auto products liability law firm represents injury victims and their families throughout the United States with 15-passenger van lawsuits against the vans’ manufacturers.

Nation’s Top Vehicle Safety Official Urges 15-Passenger Van Users to Drive with Caution this Summer, NHTSA.gov, May 12, 2008

Federal probe sought into 15-passenger vans after deadly school trip, CBC.ca, January 15, 2008

Related Web Resource:

Reducing the Risks of Rollover Vans in 15-Passenger Vans, NHTSA.gov

Study Confirms 15-Passenger Van Rollover Risk, Consumer Affairs, May 26, 2005

Continue reading "NHTSA Warning Highlights Dangers of Riding in 15-Passenger Vans" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

Ford Motor Inc. is voluntarily recalling over 655,000 F-150 and Lincoln Mark LT Pickup Trucks following reports of 11 minor accidents. 2005 and 2006 models with 5.4 liter 3-valve engines are affected by the recall.

The automaker wants to repair a hose that could affect a truck’s braking power if the hose were to become swollen and detach from the intake manifold. The driver might then lose the “assist” function that gives the brakes extra power and would have to step on the pedal more forcefully to stop the truck.

Brake Problems
Brake problems can lead to awful consequences for drivers, passengers, and pedestrians, especially when one of the motor vehicles involved is a large, heavy truck. Injuries sustained in a truck accident can be catastrophic and may result in spinal cord injuries, traumatic brain injuries, or massive internal injuries.

Examples of other brake problems that can cause serious accidents:

• Defective parking brakes
• Problems with the hydraulic lines
• Damaged brake pads
• Brake failure

If you or someone you love was injured in a truck accident or a car accident that occurred because of a defective auto part, you may be able to hold the auto manufacturer, the car dealership, or the auto maintenance shop financially responsible for your injury accident. Calling attention to the product defect may also get the problem fixed and prevent other people from getting hurt.

Over the years, our products liability law firm has successfully represented many injury victims of defective motor vehicles. We take your automotive products liability case very seriously. We even employ an in-house engineering staff that are experts on vehicle safety and design.

Ford recalls more than 655,000 trucks, CNN.com, May 14, 2008

Ford Recalls Trucks for Faulty Break Hose, NewsInferno.com, May 15, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Recall Information, Ford Motor Co.

Continue reading "Ford Recalls Over 655,000 Lincoln Mark LT and F-150 Pickup Trucks " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says that occupant protection provided by midsized cars during side impact collisions is getting better, but passenger protection during rear-end collisions continues to be poor or marginal. The Institute announced its findings after testing a number of midsized cars, including the Chevrolet Malibu, the Nissan Altima, the Dodge Avenger, the Kia Optima, the Infiniti G35, the Mitsubishi Gallant, and the Saturn Aura.

All of the cars earned good ratings for solid passenger protection during frontal accidents. Except for the KIA Optima, they also earned high ratings for side crash protection. The presence of side air bags in all of the cars was one of the main reasons cited for the improved test results—compared to to midsized cars that were tested in 2004.

The only car to test well for rear crashworthiness was the Kia Optima, whose seat/head restraints received top ratings.

Rear-End Collision Safety
If a vehicle moves forward when struck during a rear end collision, its seats can push the occupants’ bodies forward. If a passenger’s head doesn’t have any support, it can fall behind as the torso moves forward and may cause neck injuries. Installing the proper head restraints allows the head and torso to move forward together and minimizes neck injuries, including whiplash.

Neck injuries are the most common injury that occurs during auto accidents. A neck injury can lead to whiplash, nerve damage, disc damage, torn ligaments, headaches, tingling sensation in the arms, and severe pain.

Rear-end collisions, like all other car accidents, can also lead to more catastrophic injuries, including traumatic brain injuries, a broken neck, burn injuries, spinal cord injuries, and wrongful death.

In 2004, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced a new safety standard for head restraints, requiring them to be placed higher and closer to the head. The head restraints must also be adjustable.

If you or someone you love was seriously injured in a car accident because the automobile lacked the proper safety measures or the head restraint, a front or side airbag, or another device or auto part was defective, contact our auto products liability law firm right away to discuss your case. You may be entitled to personal injury compensation.

New crash tests of midsize cars: protection in side impacts improves, but most cars tested still afford marginal or poor protection in rear crashes, IIHS.org, April 10, 2008

NHTSA Announces Upgraded Rule for Head Restraints in Vehicles, NHTSA, December 7, 2004

Related Web Resources:

New Crash Tests of Midsize Cars, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (PDF)

Whiplash Neck Injuries, Head Rests, Head Restraints

Continue reading "Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Says Many Midsized Cars Still Do Not Provide Proper Occupant Protection During Rear-End Collisions " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

The SUV rollover lawsuit filed against Mitsubishi Motors by the family of TLC Singer Lisa “Left Eye” Lopes will go forward, says the Georgia Court of Appeals. The auto manufacturing giant had tried to have the wrongful death lawsuit dismissed because the company is located abroad and the accident occurred in Honduras.

Lopes died while on vacation in April 2002 in a rollover collision outside the town of La Ceiba. Lopes, 30, was driving the Mitsubishi SUV that rolled over.

Representing the pop star’s family in the case is Attorney Stuart Ollanik, a senior partner at the auto products liability law firm of Gilbert, Ollanik & Komyatte,PC. Mr. Ollanik says that the sport utility vehicle that Lopes was operating was not as resistant to rollovers as it could and should have been—especially because many SUVs that are now being made are “a little lower, just a little bit wider, and with electronic stability." Electronic stability systems can automatically adjust the steering and braking of a motor vehicle so that it doesn’t tip over.

Mr. Ollanik and Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, PC are long-term advocates of improving SUVs. Testing conducted by the law firm show that just lowering the center of gravity of a sport utility vehicle and widening the wheel base can prevent an SUV from rolling over. Many engineers and safety experts agree.

Mitsubishi has denied any wrongdoing related to Lopes’s rollover death.

Our auto products liability law firm is nationally recognized for helping injured clients and their families across the United States recover injury and wrongful death compensation from some of the largest auto manufacturers in the country and the world.

To watch Stuart Ollanik's recent interview with Fox Colorado News please visit: SUV Lawsuit Aimed At Improving Safety, MyFoxColorado.com, March 9, 2008

TLC's Lisa 'Left Eye' Lopes dies in wreck, CNN.com, April 26, 2002

Related Web Resources:

A Few Facts About SUVs and Safety, PBS.org

The Physics of SUV Rollover Accidents

Continue reading "Appeals Court Says SUV Rollover Lawsuit Against Mitsubishi For the 2002 Death of Pop Star Lisa “Left Eye” Lopes Can Go Forward" »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Sport Utility Vehicle Rollovers

Bookmark:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is trying to relocate some 35,000 families out of the trailers and mobile homes that the agency had provided after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Results from tests by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention confirm that there are dangerous levels of formaldehyde fumes in many of the trailers.

Formaldehyde is an airborne chemical and a preservative commonly found in construction materials. Exposure to too much formaldehyde can lead to breathing problems and possibly even cancer. The toxin can be found in construction materials, such as composite wood and plywood panels, which were used in the thousands of FEMA trailers.

The CDC test results is not the first time that there has been an indication that the FEMA trailers and mobile homes may have been causing health problems for its residents. A number of people living in the homes have complained of different health issues, such as headaches, asthma, sinus problems, respiratory distress, nosebleeds, and runny noses.

As early as last April, the Sierra Club tested FEMA trailers and found formaldehyde concentrations up to .34 parts per million in many of them—an excessively high amount. Even after these test results, FEMA maintained that the toxic problem was isolated to only a handful of trailers and that the mobile homes were generally safe for use. FEMA had suggested that improving ventilation by airing out the trailers would help.

There are over 35,000 FEMA trailers and mobile homes in Louisiana, Mississippi, and other states. Over 144,000 mobile homes and trailers have housed Katrina victims at some point.

The CDC says it has not found a direct connection between the toxin and the different illnesses and symptoms that the occupants in the trailers have reported, but it is recommending that trailer residents move out as soon as possible.

The trailers were manufactured quickly to accommodate all the Katrina victims. Residents have also complained that the trailers and homes are cramped and poorly made.

Toxic FEMA Trailer Cases
Our products liability law firm has successfully dealt with many injury cases throughout the United States involving all kinds of defective motor vehicles, as well as injury and death cases brought about from exposure to hazardous toxins and wastes. One of our Toxic FEMA Trailer Lawyers would be happy to speak with you during a free consultation.

FEMA slammed for using toxic trailers, MercuryNews.com, February 15, 2008

FEMA to step up efforts to move hurricane victims from toxic trailers, Baltimore Sun/Associated Press, February 14, 2008

Related Web Resources:

FEMA Trailer Study, CDC

Sierra Club Action Confirms FEMA Inaction On Gulf Coast, Sierra Club, July 23, 2007

FEMA

Continue reading "FEMA Moving 35,000 Hurricane Katrina Families Out of Toxic Trailers " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability

Bookmark:

Ford Motor Co. announced two separate recalls on Monday that affect over 180,000 vans and sports utility vehicles.

The larger recall affects almost 124,000 2007-2008 Lincoln Navigator SUVs and Ford Expeditions. Ford says that the spring system located inside the side door handles might break and prevent the door from closing properly or cause it to open unexpectedly during a side collision. The Michigan-based auto manufacturer plans to replace the interior side door handles.

Ford’s second recall involves 57,000 2007 Navigator and Expedition SUVs and 2006-2007 E-150, E-250 and E-350 vans. Ford says the vehicles’ fuel rail crossover hose could crack, leak fuel, and cause a fire.

The auto manufacturing giant has already recalled over 10 million motor vehicles because of fire hazard concerns. No incidents related to this recall have been reported so far.

There have, however, been two separate fire incidents involving 2007 Chevrolet SUV’s. This week, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration officially opened an investigation into whether the 2007 Chevrolet SUVs are susceptible to catching fire. Chervrolet SUVs are made by General Motors.

The formal probe follows two separate incidents where an SUV ignited while the engine was turned off. Both incidents took place while the SUVs were parked in home garages. Two people were injured in one fire, and a great deal of property damage occurred during both incidents.

At this time, the source of the two fires has not been determined-although the engine, battery, wiring, and engine cooling are possible sources.

Some 400,000 motor vehicles are part of the investigation. The NHTSA will take a look at both the Tahoe and the GMC Yukon.

Our motor vehicle fire attorneys have helped many injured clients recover compensation from some of the country’s largest auto manufacturers because their motor vehicles ignited due to a product defect. Visit the Automotives Product Liability: Fires section of our Web site for more information.

Ford Recalls 180,000 Vehicles, Foxbusiness.com, February 11, 2008

US investigates reports of fires in Chevy Tahoes, Reuters, February 11, 2008

Feds Probe Fire Complaints in Chevy Tahoe, GMC Yukon, Consumer Affairs, February 9, 2008

Related Web Resources:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

General Motors

Ford Motors

Continue reading "Ford Recall and GM Chevrolet Fire Incidents Rekindle Fire Hazard Concerns " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Fires

Bookmark:

In Florida, a Maine couple is suing Mitsubishi Motors for the death of their son. Donna and Peter Laliberte are accusing the auto manufacturing giant of covering up defect flaws in its Montero Sport line, which resulted in the tragic death of 25-year-old Scott Laliberte.

Laliberte was killed while riding in a 2000 Montero Sport in September 2004 on Interstate 95 in Brevard County, Florida. His friend had been driving the SUV when the single-vehicle rollover accident occurred. Laliberte’s parents allege in their lawsuit that their son was partially ejected from the motor vehicle during the rollover accident because the seat recliner mechanism and seat belt both had inherent flaws.

Halfway through the 2000 model year, Mitsubishi had introduced a new 2000 Montero Sport. The automaker wanted to fix certain flaws detected during crash tests. Mitsubishi, however, did not report the flaws.

Mitsubishi’s reputation took a beating that year after admitting it had spent decades covering up auto defects and try to secretly repair the problems without issuing recalls. Dozens of motor vehicle accidents occurred because of these defects.

The manufacturer giant admits that it incorporated a 10-inch loop into the seat belt of the newer 2000 Montero Sport to better protect passengers because the original stitching came loose during a crash test. Mitsubishi, however, maintains that the original 2000 Montero Sport did not have problems with the seat or seat belt.

Seatbelts—when used and used correctly—can save lives. However, a seat belt system that is poorly made or defective can sometimes be the difference between life and death for the person using the flawed seatbelt. Thousands of people die every year because an auto manufacturer did not fulfill its obligation to consumers by designing a seat belt system that works.

Common Seat Belt Defects Include:

Torn or Ripped Webbing: A flaw in the webbing of the seat belt allows it to rip apart during an accident.

Inertial Unlatching: A problem with the latch plate of the seat belt causes it to become unlatched during an accident

Retractor Failure: A problem with the belt’s retractor design or during manufacturing prevents it from locking and properly securing the passenger.

Visit the Defective Seatbelt and Restraint System Cases section of our Web site for a list of more seat belt defects.

For over 20 years, our products liability law firm has represented many families and individuals in products liability lawsuits against some of the biggest car manufactures in the world.

Couple takes on carmaker in death of son, Palmbeachpost.com, February 4, 2008

Related Web Resources:

SafetyForum

Mitsubishi Motors

Continue reading " Products Liability Lawsuit Claims Mitsubishi Covered Up Design Flaws that Caused Wrongful Death " »

Posted by Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, P.C. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Defective Seatbelt and Restraint System Cases

Bookmark: