Product Liability Law Blog

The Nevada Supreme Court is upholding the $32.2 million defective tire verdict against Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company in the tire blowout accident that killed three victims and injured seven others. Goodyear had argued that the jury award was excessive. However, the court says that the loss of life and serious injuries justify the amount.

The tragic car accident happened on August 16, 2004 when a tire blew out on a car going from Nevada to Kansas. The vehicle overturned on Interstate 70 close to Moab, Utah. Frank Enriquez, Evangelina Tapia, and Andres Torres died from their injuries and their guardians and relatives sued Goodyear, Ford Motor Company, and Valley View Hitch & Truck Rental for wrongful death. The latter two companies have already settled their cases with the plaintiffs.

Tire Defects
Tire blowouts and tire failure can result in car accidents with catastrophic consequences for those involved. Tire manufacturers know that they must design and make their tires properly because certain flaws can result in tread separation, tire blowouts, single-vehicle crashes, rollover accidents, or multi-vehicle collisions. Installation errors and improper maintenance can also lead to these types of car crashes.

With summer here, our tire defect attorneys want to remind motorists that hotter roads can increase the chances of a tire blowout happening. This can cause injury to the people riding in the vehicle with you, pedestrians, and/or the occupants of other vehicles.

There are steps that you can take to decrease the chances of a tire blowout, including:

• Ensure that your tires are properly inflated
• Slow down when on a highway
• Be gentler than usual with your vehicle when turning corners or on curves
• Replace old or worn out tires
• Watch out for any road debris or defects that can damage your tires

$32 million judgment against Goodyear in fatal crash upheld, Las Vegas Sun, July 2, 2010

Extreme Heat Can Cause Tire Blowouts, Star Tribune, June 27, 2009

Related Web Resources:

Tire Safety Information, NHTSA

Why Tires Fail, AAICar.com

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

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Nevada , States , Tires , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

A jury has awarded the family of Sarah Goodner a $1.8 million auto products liability verdict for her wrongful death. The 19-year-old sustained fatal injuries during a rollover car accident involving a Hyundai Tucson in July 2007.

Sarah and her sister Rebekah, then 16, were taking turns driving from San Angelo to Dallas Texas when the tragic car crash happened. At some point, Rebekah fell asleep at the wheel. Sarah, who had reclined her seat so she could rest, woke her sister up and that was when the younger girl overcorrected the sport utility vehicle, causing it to rollover three times.

While Rebekah’s seat belt kept her securely in her seat, Sarah slid out from under safety belt. She was thrown out the rear window and suffered fatal head injuries. Sarah’s family then sued Hyundai for Texas auto products liability.

Reclining Car Seat Defect
Experts say that 45 degrees is the farthest angle that a car seat can recline back before it becomes dangerous. During the auto products liability trial, evidence presented showed that the reason the seat belt failed to keep Sarah in her chair was because the seat was fully reclined. This allowed her to slide out from under her safety belt. Her family’s wrongful death lawyers accused Hyundai of failing to use available technology that would keep seats from reclining beyond the 45 degree angle and that this negligence on the part of the automaker cost Sarah her life.

On April 22, a federal jury found Hyundai responsible for Sarah’s wrongful death. They agreed with the plaintiffs that the seat was defectively designed because it was able to recline too far back. This is the first time that a jury has found that a reclining seat defect can prove fatal during a car accident.

Car's safety design defect caused teen's death, Colorado Connection, May 5, 2010

Teen's death in Big Country brings $1.8M judgment against Hyundai, Reporter News, April 30, 2010

Related Web Resource:
Hyundai

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

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Seat Back Defects , States , Texas , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

More than six months after the runaway Toyota car crash that claimed the life of off-duty California Highway Patrol Officer Mark Saylor, his wife, daughter, and brother-in law, their relatives are suing Toyota Motor Corp for California auto products liability. The tragic Lexus acceleration accident, caused by a an ill-fitting floor mat and the gas pedal that got entangled in it, prevented Saylor from being able to stop the car and prompted the first Toyota recall over floor mats and gas pedals.

Now, more than 8.5 million Toyota vehicles have been recalled over floor mats, sticking gas pedals, and other accelerator problems. Although the automaker has apologized for these defects that resulted in many cars becoming a possible accident hazard to millions of motorists, for many runaway Toyota and Lexus accident victims, the repairs and apology come too late.

In addition to naming Toyota as a defendant, the California auto products liability lawsuit, filed by the parents of Saylor and his wife, is suing the auto manufacturer’s US division, other corporate entities, and the Lexus dealership that loaned the vehicle to Saylor while his car was undergoing service. According to the accident report, another driver who had borrowed the same vehicle from the dealer a few days before the tragic auto accident complained to the receptionist that the Lexus had accelerated out of control when the gas pedal got stuck in the floor mat. Fortunately, he was able to free the accelerator when he put the gear shift in neutral.

Meantime, other victims and surviving family members are filing their Toyota auto products liability lawsuits. Just last week, Daniel and Nancy Murtha filed a New York wrongful death complaint against Toyota Motor Corp. The Murtha’s lost their 5-year-old son Jacob, after he sustained traumatic injuries during a Lexus acceleration accident on July 29, 2008. Nancy, who was driving the vehicle, says that when she stepped on the brakes, the car wouldn’t stop. Instead, the Lexus accelerated out of control and crashed into a rock wall. She fell into a coma, sustained neck, knee, hip, and lower back injuries, and lost part of her intestines and her spleen during the single-vehicle crash.

The Murtha’s complaint contends that even though Toyota knew for years that a number of vehicles were at risk of sudden, unintended acceleration, the automaker failed to install a brake-to-idle override system that would let motorists regain control of their vehicles.

Westchester County, New York Parents File Suit Against Toyota for Death of Their Five-Year-Old Son in Lexus Sudden Acceleration Incident, MarketWatch, March 18, 2010

Toyota sued over deaths in key California crash, Reuters, March 4, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Toyota Motor Corp.

Toyota was asked in 2007 to consider installing software to prevent sudden acceleration, Los Angeles Times, March 14, 2010

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

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Brake Defects , California , Floor Mats , New York , States , Toyota Safety Issues , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Nearly five years after Atwilda Brown died from severe injuries that she sustained when her chenille bathrobe caught fire, the elderly woman’s family is suing Blair LLC for her wrongful death. They are seeking $30 million.

The 80-year-old was making tea on February 12, 2005 when the tragic accident caused by the defective clothing happened. She is one of nine people who have died because a Blair chenille robe caught fire. Most of the victims were elderly people. Three of the people who died were cooking when the tragic burn accidents happened.

Brown’s daughter, Sharon Davis, says she wants more people to realize how deadly the chenille robes have proven to be for wearers. Already, Blair LLC has announced two recalls because the robes and other chenille items do not meet federal flammability standards. This means that the person wearing the robe and those nearby are at risk of burn injuries if the wearer makes contact with an open flame.

A few weeks ago, the daughters of Evelyn and Murray Rogoff also sued Blair LLC for their parents’ wrongful deaths. Last February, the sleeve of Evelyn’s chenille robe caught fire while she was making tea. Murray was also injured when he tried to help his wife.

Susan Brent says she heard her mother screaming and found her parents on the floor. She used bottles of water to stop the fire but her mom had already sustained serious arm, neck, and back injuries. Evelyn died six weeks after the burn accident. Murray died from a heart attack in July.

Brent and her sister Michele Putini are seeking nearly $2 million for products liability, which they are linking to their parents’ wrongful deaths.

Clothes are supposed to meet the US standards for flammability. While all clothes are susceptible for catching fire, certain fabrics are more susceptible to igniting faster than others, which can prove fatal to the wearer. A clothes manufacturer can be held liable if a piece of clothing proves to be a flammable hazard that causes serious burn injury or death to its wearer.

Daughters: Company's Defective Robe Caused Parents' Deaths, 10News.com, October 29, 2009

Woman Blames Robe For Mother's Death, Eyewitness News 3, October 27, 2009

Blair Expands Recall To All Women’s Chenille Apparel Due to Burn Hazard; Additional Reported Deaths Prompt Re-Announcement of Robe Recall, CPSC, October 22, 2009

Related Web Resource:
Flammable Fabrics Act

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

Posted In: Burn Injuries , California , States , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

A bankruptcy judge has approved a $24 million auto products liability settlement between Chrysler and the family of Richard Mraz. In 2007, Mraz’s loved ones won a $55 million jury award for the 38-year-old’s wrongful death. DaimlerChrysler, however, appealed the verdict, and the appeal was delayed after the auto manufacturer filed for bankruptcy in April. Negotiations between the automaker and the Mraz family's auto products liability lawyers ensued, resulting in this new settlement.

Products liability plaintiffs have expressed frustration and worry that Chrysler’s bankruptcy proceedings would prevent them from recovering personal injury and wrongful death compensation. The new Chrysler Group LLC had initially agreed to accept products liability for vehicles that were manufactured after the bankruptcy but has now agreed to accept older liabilities for injuries that were sustained after it emerged from bankruptcy last June. Chrysler auto products liability lawsuits for cases that occurred prior to the Chapter 11 filing will be limited to the old company’s assets.

The auto products liability lawyers representing Mraz’s family had insisted that Chrysler post bond during the appeals process, which allowed for negotiations with the appeal bond issuer to take place.

Mraz, 38, sustained fatal head injuries on April 13, 2004 after he was run over by the 1992 Dodge Dakota he had been driving moments before the deadly car accident. His family sued DaimlerChrysler for wrongful death. They claimed that the “park-to-reverse” defect is what killed Mraz.

Also known as “false park," the “park to reverse” defect is a auto part flaw that allows the transmission shift selector to get stuck in the position between park and reverse while the engine is running. The slightest movement can cause the shift selector to slip into reverse and the vehicle can end up moving backwards to strike a pedestrian, the driver (if he or she steps out of the vehicle), or another vehicle.

DaimlerChrysler had received more than 1,000 auto products liability complaints over this defect.

Judge OKs $24M Chrysler wrongful death settlement, AP, September 24, 2009

More Chrysler Personal Injury Lawsuits Will Be Recognized by New Company, About Lawsuits, August 31, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Chrysler injury victims protest outside company headquarters, ABC News, July 27, 2009

Chrysler LLC

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

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , California , States , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Two years after the death of her 2-year-old daughter, Connie Bergey is suing now defunct crib maker Simplicity for wrongful death. Her Florida furniture products liability lawsuit contends that a defect in the Simplicity 'Crib n Changer Combo, a drop side crib her daughter Serenity was using, is what caused her death.

Serenity’s head got caught in the crib’s frame. Two days after she died, a recall of over 1 million Simplicity cribs was issued that included the very same model that Serenity was using.

In her products liability lawsuit, Bergey is accusing Simplicty of knowingly selling cribs that were dangerously designed and endangering infants’ lives. She contends that the Simplicity crib recall should have been announced before her daughter died. Her Florida wrongful death complaint says that when the crib’s drop side came off, a gap was created, which caused the fatal entrapment accident. Bergey says she was devastated when she went to her daughter’s crib and, rather than finding her sleeping peacefully, discovered her daughter stuck in the side of the crib.

Simplicity is no longer in operation. The crib maker was forced out of business following dozens of child injuries and at least four kid deaths from entrapment accidents involving its defective cribs.

Even after Simplicity shut its doors, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission continued to issue more recalls. In August 2008, 900,000 bassinets were recalled. Another 600,000 drop side cribs were recalled in September 2008. Just this January, the CPSC recalled 200,000 portable play yards.

There is no loss for a parent greater than the loss of a child. It can be even more devastating to discover that your son or daughter suffocated or died in a crib that you thought would keep your child safe.

While issuing product recalls has been known to save lives, a crib recall cannot bring back the life of the children who died prior to the recall announcement.

Some other crib design defect that have been known to cause injury:

• The crib slats are spaced too far apart that an infant’s head or body can get stuck in between two slats.

• The crib’s corner posts are designed in a manner that entanglement accidents can occur.

• The mattress is made from hazardous material or its size does not fit the crib securely enough to prevent entrapment accidents from happening.

Ffamily files lawsuit after child dies in crib, WPTV, September 9, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Simplicity for Children

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Choosing a crib, American Academy of Pediatrics

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

Posted In: Florida , Infant Products , Injuries to Children & Minors , Nursery Products , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

The outcome of more than 300 auto products liability lawsuits are now being questioned, following allegations by a former senior counsel for Toyota Motor Sales Corp. that the company made him withhold key evidence from plaintiffs who had sought recovery for personal injury or wrongful death. Dimitrios P. Biller has filed a federal racketeering lawsuit alleging that because he complained to the company about its alleged misconduct he was forced to resign.

While working for Toyota between 2003 and 2007, Biller defended Toyota against plaintiffs whose rollover lawsuits pinpointed that the vehicles’ weak and unstable roofs as a cause of the injuries and deaths. His complaint also accuses Toyota of failing to turn over electronically stored data to the auto products liability lawyers of the plaintiffs.

Biller claims that the company withheld test information by allowing an engineering subsidiary to destroy key documents in hundreds of rollover accident cases where roof crush issues were a factor. He says that even today there are Toyota motor vehicles that fail to meet the automaker’s safety goals.

Our auto products liability lawyers at Gilbert, Ollanik, & Komyatte, PC have settled dozens of Toyota rollover accident cases. Biller’s allegations if they are true, are indeed very serious.

Already, a class action lawsuit has been filed accusing Toyota of illegally concealing evidence in rollover accident cases on behalf of plaintiffs who either settled or lost their auto products liability cases because certain data wasn’t made available to them. Other auto products liability law firms are now saying that they may have to consider whether their Toyota rollover lawsuits that have been resolved need to be reopened.

Toyota is calling Biller’s accusations “inaccurate and misleading.” The company is attempting have his complaint sealed because of “privileged and confidential” data that Biller should not be revealing. Biller’s lawsuit names Toyota Motor Sales, Toyota Motor Corp. of Japan, and five ex- and current lawyers and executives employed by Toyota Motor Sales as the defendants.

Victims and family members wishing to seek recovery for personal injury and wrongful death continue to file Toyota rollover lawsuits .

Rollover lawsuits could haunt Toyota, USA Today, September 2, 2009

Lawsuit: Toyota Buried Accident Evidence, CBS News, August 31, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Read the Lawsuit (PDF)

Toyota 4Runner SUV Rollover Lawsuit Filed Over Fatal Crash, About Lawsuits, August 10, 2009

Continue reading "Toyota Rollover Lawsuits: Automaker's Former Attorney Accuses Auto Manufacturer of Concealing Evidence in Over 300 Auto Products Liability Cases" »

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

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Roof Crush , Sport Utility Vehicle Rollovers , Toyota Safety Issues , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

The Arizona Court of Appeals says that a local woman who was hurt and lost her mother and daughter in a Mexico car accident can sue Continental Tire North America in the state of Arizona. Attorneys for the tire company wanted the auto products liability lawsuit to be argued in Mexico where the rollover accident happened.

Court documents state that the car accident victim, Maria Pozo Parra, was driving her motor vehicle in Yuma County when the tread in one of her tires separated. Pozo Parra then lost control of the vehicle, which rolled over. She and three other passengers were ejected from the auto. They all sustained injuries. Pozo Parra's mother and one of her daughters were killed in the rollover accident. She is suing the tire maker and the dealer that she bought the tire from for products liability.

As part of their argument that the case be tried abroad, the defendants claimed that the Arizona tire defects lawsuit had a “tenuous” connection to the state. The tire dealer is based in Arizona.

A judge in Maricopa County Superior Court agreed with the defendants and tossed out the Arizona defective tire lawsuit. Appellate Judge Diane Johnsen, however, said that the defendants' arguments could not overcome Arizona law, which lets plaintiffs decide where they want to file their civil claims.

Tire Tread Separation
Tire tread separation can lead to tire blowouts, which can cause a motorist to lose control of the vehicle. This can result in deadly rollover accidents and other kinds of auto collisions. A tire blow out can be especially dangerous when the vehicle is traveling at high speeds or if the auto, such as many sport utility vehicles, has a high gravity center.

Defective design or manufacturing defects are two common causes of tire tread separation. Examples of common tire design defects:

• Insufficient nylon overlays
• Deficient skim stock

Some causes of tire manufacturing defects:

• Poor adhesion or bonding of tire components
• Poor quality control

Yuma tire lawsuit OK'd for Arizona, Yuma Sun, August 14, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Parra V. Continental Tire

Tire Defects, Safercar.gov

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

Posted In: Arizona , States , Tires , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

The widower and children of a woman who died in an SUV rollover accident last May are suing Toyota Corporation and Courtesy Toyota of Brandon for wrongful death. Elisa Obediente, 56, died after losing control of her vehicle on Interstate 75 in Florida. According to police, she over-corrected her steering to avoid hitting another vehicle when making a lane change and her 1998 Toyota 4Runner rolled over multiple times.

The Florida auto products liability lawsuit contends that the defendants neglected to properly protect Obediente during the rollover crash. The plaintiffs are claiming that the SUV had inherent defects that could have been easily remedied, including roof rails, windshield headers, and pillars that might have prevented the severe roof crushthat occurred if they were made stronger. Because the roof did collapse inward, Obediente was partially ejected from the vehicle.

The plaintiffs’ Florida auto products liability lawyer maintains that Toyota could have easily installed Electronic Stability Control technology and that ESC could have helped the 56-year-old mother and wife to regain control of the car after over-steering. They also say other improvements could have been made at a low cost that might have prevented Obediente’s death.

Also, the Federal Registry had reportedly completed a study ranking the 4Runner as the second car most likely in its class to be involved in a rollover crash, Yet, according to the plaintiffs, Toyota failed to reveal the rollover risks and even suggested that customers purchase a tire and wheel package that actually could increase the chances of a 4Runner rolling over. They also say that the defendants knew as far back as the late 1960’s that these SUV’s were susceptible to roof crushes but they misled the public into believing that they had strengthened their vehicles to withstand such accidents.

The Florida wrongful death lawsuit also is accusing the defendants of falsifying test results to come up with inaccurate rollover crush force minimums to make it appear as if certain auto parts had been strengthened against higher roof crush forces.

The plaintiffs are seeking wrongful death compensation, as well as compensation for loss of care, financial support, companionship, love, moral support, and comfort.

Products Liability
Auto products liability cases can be brought when a design defect, manufacturing defect, or marketing defect contributed to a car crash that resulted in personal injury or wrongful death.

Woman dies after SUV rolls over on I-75, TBO.com, May 24, 2009

Toyota 4Runner SUV Rollover Lawsuit Filed Over Fatal Crash, About Lawsuits, August 10, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Toyota 4Runner Problems, AutoMotix.net

SUV Rollovers, BrainandSpinalCord.org

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

Posted In: Automotive Product Liability , Florida , Roof Crush , Sport Utility Vehicle Rollovers , States , Toyota Safety Issues , Wrongful Death

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:

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 , Toyota Safety Issues , Wrongful Death

Bookmark: