Product Liability Law Blog

More needs to be done to prove child safety when it comes to seat belts—especially as not all US states require that kids ages 4-8 use booster seats. Unfortunately most seat belts are unable to properly fit over the bodies of many children to ensure maximum protection, which can result in catastrophic seat belt-related injuries, known as seat belt syndrome, during a car accident.

Just last year, one 7-year-old’s life changed forever when she sustained seat belt-related injuries during a catastrophic Minnesota car accident. Brynn Duncan was wearing a seat belt, but she had pulled the shoulder belt over her back so it wouldn’t sit on her face. The lap belt she was using fell over her stomach. When the vehicle Brynn was riding in crashed, she sustained a crushing spinal cord injury, bowel and kidney damage, and a bruised heart.

Doctors had to remove her kidney, appendix, and gallbladder. Brynn suffered from infection and depression and sustained permanent injuries. She now requires the use of her wheelchair.

Seat belt syndrome is not uncommon and while US states that don’t require kids, ages 4-8, to use booster seats should consider whether to revise their laws (which many parents turn to for guidance), there is a lot more that auto manufacturers and seat belt designers can do to make sure that kids and adults are properly protected when wearing seat belts and that these safety devices do not cause serious injury.

Injuries linked to seat belt syndrome include liver injuries, abdominal organ injuries, bowel injuries, chest trauma, blood vessel injuries, sternum injuries, spinal cord injuries, and death. Seat belt injuries that occur because the safety device was designed poorly or because the seat belt malfunctioned can be grounds for the injured party and his or her family to file a defective seat belt lawsuit.

Recently, automaker Ford announced its latest development in seat belt technology: inflatable seat belts. Designed to improve rear-seat passenger protection, especially for kids, the belts contain airbags that are supposed to inflate during certain kinds of auto collisions. Hopefully the new belts can provide the added protection kids and adults need during an auto collision.

Ford Says Inflatable Seat Belt Could Reduce Crash Injuries, Wall Street Journal, November 9, 2009

AAA Minnesota/Iowa & Safe Kids Minnesota Support Enhanced Child Restraint Legislation "The Brynn Duncan Law", Reuters, January 6, 2009

Brynn Duncan’s condition worsens, surgery needed, Daily Journal, September 10, 2008

Related Web Resources:
Seat belt syndrome, Wrong Diagnosis

Child restraint laws, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

Continue reading "Seat Belt Syndrome: Child Safety Continues to Take a Back Seat " »

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

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Catastrophic Injuries , Defective Seatbelt and Restraint System Cases , Injuries to Children & Minors , Kids in Cars , Minnesota , Motor Vehicle Safety , Seat Belts , Spinal Cord Injuries , States

Bookmark:

According to EMS Magazine, some 475,000 US kids in the 14 and under age group suffer from traumatic brain injuries. While 90% of TBI kid patients are seen in emergency rooms and then released, there are still over 47,000 patients a year who end up hospitalized because of a TBI.

Fall accidents, car accidents, and incidents involving the victim getting hit by or struck against a hard object continue to be the most common causes of traumatic brain injuries in the US. 2,685 children die each year because of TBIs while more than 30,000 kids with TBIs will sustain permanent disabilities.

Our injuries to children and minors lawyers represent the families of babies, toddlers, young children, adolescents, and teenagers who were seriously injured in personal injury accidents. Many of our injuries to minors cases involve children who were injured or killed because of a defective product. Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, PC is one of the most recognized products liability law firms in the US.

Traumatic brain injuries—whether sustained in a car crash, from a drowning accident, in a fall accident at the playground, because the child car safety seat or seatbelt restraint system was defective, during a suffocation accident that occurred because a crib was defectively designed, or from a choking accident that happened because a child swallowed a defective toy part—can drastically alter the life of the child victim and his or her family forever.

A TBI can result in impaired vision, hearing problems, speech difficulties, muscle spasticity, seizures, paralysis, memory deficiencies, communication problems, impaired writing and reading abilities, impaired judgment, mood swings, anxiety, agitation, depression, and problems relating to others.

A TBI's degree of severity will determine the problems that can result from this type of head injury. In many instances, a child with a TBI will need special services to cope with living with a traumatic brain injury, and the ongoing therapy and medical help can become very costly. There are also other damages that a TBI victim can suffer, including loss of the ability to live a normal life, loss of independence, or the inability to enjoy the normal activities that most kids without a traumatic brain injury get to experience.

If your child’s TBI occurred because a product manufacturer, a premise owner, a car driver, a trucker, a motorcyclist, or another party was negligent or careless, your son or daughter may be entitled to personal injury recovery.

Severe Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury, EMS Responder

Traumatic Brain Injury, Kidsource.com

Related Web Resources:
Traumatic Brain Injury Information Page, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control

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

Posted In: Catastrophic Injuries , Infant Products , Injuries to Children & Minors , Kids in Cars , Motor Vehicle Safety , Nursery Products , Playground Products , Swimming Pools , Toys , Traumatic Brain Injuries

Bookmark:

General Motors Corp. has announced that it will take responsibility for auto products liability lawsuits that are filed after the car maker sought bankruptcy protection. This is good news for people who were injured after June 1. Once the company emerges from bankruptcy, the “new GM” will honor future personal injury claims involving defective autos that were made by the “old GM.”

However, the injury victims and families that filed their products liability lawsuits before the “old GM” filed for bankruptcy still have not been given a way to obtain personal injury compensation or wrongful death recovery from the car manufacturer. 38% of all auto products liability claims filed between 2003 and 2008 were against GM. A committee that represents GM car crash victims says that over 300 people have personal injury claims valued at over $1.25 billion against General Motors.

The plaintiffs of the 2,642 products liability claims against the now bankrupt Chrysler face the same lack of recourse for financial recovery. While Fiat will assume responsibilities for warranties belonging to all Chrysler autos, the Italian auto manufacturer won’t be liable for past and future products liability claims involving defective Chrysler vehicles.

For example, Colorado Springs resident Sonya Segid’s arm was shattered when an air bag in her Dodge vehicle exploded. She now has two long scars on her arm. She is a sergeant who can no longer fire weapons and no won’t be joining her husband in Iraq.

Auto products liability lawyer Jim Gilbert of the law firm of Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte PC represents a number of personal injury and wrongful death clients in several states with products liability claims against Chrysler and GM. Mr. Gilbert is one of the attorneys calling on Congress to establish a fund for Chrysler and GM products liability victims. Otherwise, states could end up paying for medical care. Also, Attorney Gilbert is concerned that failure to determine what defect caused an injury or death could also result in more people getting hurt in the future because they won’t receive any warning about possible defects.

Considering that most car accidents caused by motor vehicle defects result in catastrophic if not fatal injuries that can be very costly to treat and recover from, this leaves auto products liability victims and their families at a huge disadvantage. Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte PC is nationally recognized as one of the products liability law firms in the country that obtains the best results possible for clients and their families. To find out more about our auto products liability lawyers and read about their latest headline making cases, please click on our In The News page for more information.

Contact our products liability law firm today.

Auto deals leave victims without day in court, 9News.com, June 24, 2009

G.M. to Maintain Legal Liability for Claims, New York Times, June 27, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, US Courts

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

Posted In: Colorado , Motor Vehicle Safety , States

Bookmark:

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, extra vehicle weight and size add up to more occupant protection during auto collisions. This means that people who choose to buy smaller cars because they are more economical in terms of price and gas usage could be compromising personal safety.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety conducted three front-to-front crash tests. A minicar or microcar and a midsize vehicle from the same automaker were used for each test. Pairs used were 2009 models from Honda, Daimler, and Toyota—all auto brands with minis and micros that received good frontal crashworthiness ratings.

While the Smart Fortwo, the Honda Fit, and the Toyota Yaris performed well in the frontal offset barrier test, they all performed poorly during frontal collisions with midsize cars—in these instances, the Mercedes Class C, the Honda Accord, and the Toyota Camry. During all three tests, the smaller cars didn’t do as well as the midsized vehicles, with dummies in the smaller vehicles exhibiting a greater likelihood of injury.

The greater the difference in weight between the two vehicles, the higher the risk of injury for the occupants of the smaller cars. The longer the vehicle size, including the length of distance from the front of the motor vehicle to the compartment where occupants would be seated, the lower the force of impact on the people in the longer vehicle.

According to 2007 crash statistics, the fatality rate for 1- to 3-year-old minicars during multi-vehicle collisions is nearly two times higher than the fatality rate for bigger cars. For midsized cars, the death rate during single-vehicle collisions was 17% lower than for minicars.

Nearly 50% of all crash fatalities during single vehicle collisions occurred in minicars. While there is the claim that minicars are easier to drive, which can reportedly help drivers avoid getting involved in an auto accident, insurance data reveals otherwise, with four times more crash damage claims filed for mini-4-door vehicles than for midsize cars.

There are, of course, people who believe that small cars and mini cars are as safe as their bigger counterparts. And while these smaller vehicles now have more safety features, such as airbags and electronic stability control, bigger cars still have the greater advantage when it comes to occupant protection and safety.

The IIHS has brought up the interesting point that establishing lower speed limits will save gas and improve safety. In 1974, thousands of barrels of fuel, as well as thousands of lives were saved when the country had a national maximum speed limit of 55 mph. Highway fatalities dropped 20% from 55,511 in 1973 to 46,402 in 1974.

Motor vehicle crashes are a leading cause of death in the United States. While auto accidents do happen because of driver error or negligence, there are steps that auto manufacturers can take to maximize occupant safety and save lives.

Failure to manufacture or design vehicles that will keep passengers and drivers safe can be grounds for an automotive products liability lawsuit if the car maker could have or should have done more to make the vehicle involved in a car accident safer so that injuries or deaths could have been prevented.

New crash tests demonstrate the influence of vehicle size and weight on safety in crashes; results are relevant to fuel economy policies, IIHS.org, April 14, 2009

Car Size and Weight are Crucial, Status Report (PDF)

Related Web Resources:
1974: New speed limit to curb fuel use, BBC

Cap U.S. Speed Limit At 55 Mph To Save Gas, CBS, July 7, 2008

Continue reading "IIHS Crash Tests Reveal that Bigger and Heavier Motor Vehicles Exhibit Greater Occupant Protection During Auto Collisions" »

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

Posted In: Motor Vehicle Safety

Bookmark:

With a new administration comes new opportunities for auto safety. There are two areas in which the president’s new appointee to head the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) can immediately improve American auto safety. First, he or she can complete the revamping of some of our most antiquated auto safety regulations. For example, we are still operating under a roof strength standard written thirty-five years ago. Imagine the technology improvements over the last thirty-five years – none of these are reflected in this old, inadequate standard. NHTSA has recognized as much and proposed replacing the rule with a requirement for stronger, safer roofs, but that rule has never been finalized.

Similarly, testing rules adopted decades ago make rollover testing optional. With rollovers accounting for over 1/3 of all auto fatalities, it is time to make that testing mandatory.

Finally, in the past couple years, some regulators have tried to insert regulatory language that would ban auto safety lawsuits, despite the fact that congress, and the legislation establishing NHTSA, expressly said that such safety lawsuits would be allowed even for products that meet minimum safety standards where it can be shown that the product is nonetheless defective. The new administration should remove these safety lawsuit “preemption” provisions from new proposed rules.

~Stuart Ollanik~

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

Posted In: Motor Vehicle Safety

Bookmark:

I wouldn’t buy a new car without the following three safety features:

1. Electronic Stability Control (“ESC”). These systems sense loss of control systems before it gets out of hand. By sensing any kind of vehicle slippage to the left or right, they use the vehicle’s antilock brake system components and other existing systems to help the driver maintain control of the vehicle. Researchers including the government and major auto manufacturers predict dramatic reductions in the number of accidents in vehicles equipped with ESC, so much so that this is probably the most important safety innovation since seat belts. And there are plenty of these systems available. Manufacturers have been putting the systems on some cars for over a decade, so even used car purchasers can insist on this feature. I would not buy any vehicle without electronic stability control.

2. Side Curtain Airbags that Activate in Rollover. There are two kinds of side bags and both do a good job. Torso bags protect your body, and side curtain airbags protect your head. These head bags can protect you in side impacts, the kind of crash in which the occupant is closest to the striking vehicle. If a rollover sensor is used, side curtains can also protect people in rollovers by keeping them in the car. You are much safer in a rollover if you stay within the confines of a vehicle. As you could imagine, when your head sticks far out the window, your injury/death risk sky rockets.

3. Seat Belt Pretensioners. These systems snug up the seat belts when an accident is sensed, a great and smart safety feature. Pretensioners are found in many cars manufactured since the late 1990s.and some manufactured before that. They are more widely available for, and more important for, the front seats.

If you have kids, other safety features are important including the availability of LATCH systems and tether anchors to ensure the child seats can be held tight to the vehicle, and rear seat adjustable seat belt D-rings to allow belts to be properly adjusted for kids in booster seats or teens and small adults who are too big for booster seats. Look elsewhere on this website and blog for other information on child safety, an issue we will continue to cover because it is a particular passion of ours.

~Stuart Ollanik~

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

Posted In: Motor Vehicle Safety

Bookmark:

Friends often ask me whether the car they are thinking of buying is safe. I always refer them to these three terrific sources of car safety information:

1. WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV – This is the government’s website reporting on its safety testing of vehicles. The government doesn’t test every vehicle sold, but it tests many of them, more rigorously than in the tests the car makers are required to pass to sell the car. It rates the vehicles with a star rating system so you can compare safety from one vehicle to another. If you “drill down” deeper into the site, you can also see the raw numbers – the test scores. One caution: the star ratings only compare similarly sized cars. In frontal collisions, for instance, the tests involve crashing the vehicles into non-deformable barriers, which simulates a head-on collision with a car of the same weight. The ratings don’t factor in the fact that a heavy car is going to have an advantage over a lighter car in any such collision.

2. WWW.IIHS.ORG - Like the government, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash tests some, but not all, cars in very rigorous testing. The results are reported on this very helpful website. Not only does this site give good comparisons between cars, using its own rating system, it also gives details about its tests and even allows you to watch the videos. Like the government website, the Insurance Institute site can help you identify not only safer models, but safer model years for those models, which is useful if you are shopping for a used car.

3. WWW.CONSUMERREPORTS.ORG – Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports, is a great source of all sorts of information on new and used cars including safety, reliability, features, pricing, even how fun the vehicle is to drive. You can get some basic information online for free, and more information for a small subscription fee. Or, you can go to your local library and look at the annual April car edition for a wealth of information. The April issue is a great starting point for figuring out which car is right for you.

I always check all three sites when looking for a car for my family or helping friends with their car search. The sites don’t tell everything, for instance, some cars are “designed to the test” so that they perform well in safety tests but contain some other safety flaw or defect that undermines car safety. For those issues, watch this website and blog.

~Stuart Ollanik~

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

Posted In: Motor Vehicle Safety

Bookmark:

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has announced its TOP SAFETY PICKS for 2009. 72 motor vehicles earned TOP SAFETY PICK awards, which is more than twice the number of vehicles that received the award for 2008.

Garnering a top safety pick award means that a vehicle does the best job it can to protect vehicle occupants during front, rear, and side auto collisions, as evidenced during IIHS tests. All award winners also come with electronic stability control (ESC), which helps motorists stay in control of their cars in the event of vehicle instability. ESC also decreases the chances of a deadly single-vehicle accident occurring by about 50% and reduces the risks of deadly rollover accidents by up to 70%.

Leading the pack with the most TOP SAFETY PICK awards is Ford and subsidiary Volvo with 16 winners, including the Ford Taurus and the Ford Fusion. Acura, Honda, and Subaru were also big winners with at least one TOP SAFETY PICK in each class where they submitted a vehicle.

Included among the TOP SAFETY PICK winners are Acura RL, 4-door Honda Accord, Subaru Tribeca, Cadillac DTS, Ford Fusion (with optional ESC), 4-door Honda Civic with optional ESC (except for the Si model), Saab 9-3, Volvo C70, Honda Fit, Hyundai Entourage, Buick Enclave, Audi Q7, Honda Pilot, Nissan Murano, Toyota Tacoma, and Volkswagen TIguan. For a complete list of TOP SAFETY PICK winners, visit the IIHS Web site (see link below).

Due to inadequate head restraint designs, 26 models, including the Toyota Prius Hybrid, the Kia Amanti, and the Chevrolet Malibu, failed to earn TOP SAFETY PICK awards despite good results during side and frontal crash tests. Chrysler, which is the only big automaker that did not win any TOP SAFETY PICK awards would have had five awards if its Dodge Avenger, Sebring Convertible, Chrysler Sebring, Chrysler Town & County, and Dodge Grand Caravan came with better head restraints. The Institute says drivers of motor vehicles with good seat/head restraints have a 15% less chance of suffering neck injuries in rear-end collisions. Neck strain or sprain is the most common kind of injury reported by traffic accident victims.

Unfortunately, there are many motor vehicles in the marketplace that continue to pose a danger to motorists because they are poorly designed or are made with faulty vehicle parts. Regular auto recalls continue to reflect that there is much more that auto manufacturers and safety officials must do to improve auto safety so that deadly motor vehicle accidents are prevented.

72 Winners of 2009 TOP SAFETY PICK Awards, IIHS, November 25, 2008

Gallery of Some of the TOP SAFETY PICK winners, CNN.com

Related Web Resources:
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

Procedures for rating seat/head restraints, IIHS

Continue reading "72 Motor Vehicles Receive IIHS Top Safety Pick Awards for 2009" »

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

Posted In: Motor Vehicle Safety

Bookmark: