|
7 million vehicles may have same transmission problems that led to $55.4M verdict
|
Everybody gets out of their cars and leaves the
engine running. People take in the mail, open the garage, or go to the
airport and load and unload their luggage. There’s no reason to put the
parking brake on with a properly functioning transmission.
Unless, that is, it’s one of 7 million
DaimlerChrylser vehicles that may have a dangerous transmission defect
that causes the vehicle to jolt into reverse and travel backwards,
sometimes at high speeds and often before the driver can get in to stop
it.
A Los Angeles jury recently awarded $55.4 million to
the wife and three children of a longshoreman who was run over and
killed by a truck that had the defect.
The park-to-reverse defect, as it’s come to be
known, kicks in when the driver thinks the transmission is in park, but
it’s really stuck in an intermediate position between park and reverse.
The car is momentarily stationary, the driver walks away, transmission
fluid builds up within the system and soon enough the driverless
vehicle begins moving, sometimes dangerously fast.
DaimlerChrysler claimed that vehicles don’t move
when they’re shut off, the parking brake set and the keys removed from
the ignition. The company also maintained there’s no such thing as a
position between park and reverse.
But a corporate memo introduced at the Los Angeles trial outlines the
|
|
disadvantages of analyzing the defect, claimed
by nearly 1,000 drivers, 60 of whom were injured. Liability, the memo
said, could be pinned on the company if it analyzed the transmission
and found the problem was real. So instead of studying the
transmission, the company did a recall. They switched out one part in
the transmission for another, a move DaimlerChrysler’s own engineers
said at the time would do nothing to fix the problem.
By some calculations based on the number of vehicles
that have the same transmission system, between 5 million and 7 million
vehicles could be affected.
Ultimately, jurors in the Los Angeles case returned
a verdict of $55.4 million. They awarded a little more than $3 million
for economic damages, about $2 million for non-economic damages and $50
million in punitive damages. They found the longshoreman 10 percent
responsible. They also found that the man’s employer was 15 percent at
fault for the accident. The employer owned the vehicle, and according
to DaimlerChrysler ignored 12 recall notices.
|
|
Slip-and-fall cases easier to prove
|
Massachusetts is the latest state to make it easier
to prove store owners are legally responsible for injuries caused by
slipping and falling at the store.
To win a slip-and-fall case against the owner of a
store, an injured person in Massachusetts previously had to prove the
owner had actual notice of a condition that led to the fall.
For example, before it could be liable for someone’s
injuries, a grocery store had to know (or should have known) that a
slippery substance was on the floor before the person fell and injured
himself.
But that rule is no more after a recent ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
The court has adopted a new rule in so-called
premises liability cases that should make it easier to prove a store
owner was negligent.
The SJC said a customer only needs to prove a
store’s “mode of operation” created a dangerous condition that was
“reasonably foreseeable” to the store owner.
Several other states have adopted this legal rule as
well. They are: Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana,
Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma,
Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
In the Massachusetts case, a man entered a
supermarket, and as he was walking through the store, he slipped and
fell in the front crossing aisle near the customer service counter,
seriously injuring himself.
He was hospitalized for nearly a month and incurred substantial medical expenses.
Immediately after falling, the customer observed the area where he had slipped
|
|
and spotted the pulp of a grape on the floor.
A store manager later testified under oath he also
observed the area and noticed a small piece of grape and some clear
liquid next to it.
All grapes in the store were packaged in
individually sealed bags that could be easily opened by hand. The
grapes were located on a tiered display table, surrounded by mats in
the produce department.
A trial court judge rejected the man’s negligence
claim, saying he couldn’t prove the store had actual knowledge of the
crushed grape on the floor and the danger it posed.
But the SJC reversed that decision.
The court ruled the man’s case could proceed to
trial. He should be allowed, the court said, to submit evidence the
store’s sale of grapes in individually sealed bags in a self-service
area made it reasonably foreseeable that grapes could fall out of the
bags onto the floor and create a dangerous condition.
A key point at trial will be whether the supermarket
should have anticipated the dangerous condition, and whether it took
reasonable precautions to protect individuals from that condition.
Image: istockphoto.com
|
|
Tire failures of large RVs lead to growing number of lawsuits
|
A growing number of lawsuits are being filed around
the country due to tire blowouts on large luxury motor homes that have
caused serious personal injuries.
The heavy loads in the RVs coupled with weight
shifting inside them put a lot of pressure on tires that appear to be
inadequate for the load, resulting in sudden tire failures.
The tire failures typically occur in the front end
of the RV, which usually only has single tires on each side of the
vehicle instead of doubles. This is particularly dangerous because a
front-wheel blowout makes it almost impossible to steer.
|
|
Because many RVs are typically used only a month or
two a year, the tires tend to be old, heightening the risk of tread
separation, a risk associated with older tires.
Several of the lawsuits point to the Goodyear G159
tire as the culprit in the accidents. The lawsuits allege the tire –
designed for use on commercial pickup and delivery trucks – is
inadequate for large RVs.
Goodyear denies there is any problem with the G159
tire. The company no longer markets the tire for use on RVs, and in
2000 introduced a tire made specifically for large motor homes.
|
|
Mixed results in Vioxx lawsuits
|
Jurors delivered a defense verdict in the Midwest’s
first trial over the once-blockbuster painkiller Vioxx, clearing the
pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. in the 2003 fatal heart attack
of a 52-year-old woman.
The victory was Merck’s 10th in 15 trials in the
mushrooming litigation, which now includes an estimated 27,000 personal
injury lawsuits and 265 potential class actions. Although Merck has won
two-thirds of the Vioxx trials to date, it has suffered some big losses
– a $47.5 million verdict in a New Jersey state court, a $51 million
verdict in federal court in New Orleans and a $253 million verdict in
Texas that was later reduced to $26 million.
In the most recent verdict, an Illinois jury deliberated for two days before agreeing with the company that Patty
|
|
Schwaller’s weight, diabetes and high blood
pressure were the more likely causes of her collapse and sudden death
than the Vioxx she had used for 20 months. The 5-foot-2 woman’s weight
fluctuated between 250 and 300 pounds for roughly two decades before
her death, attorneys have acknowledged.
Schwaller’s husband claimed that Vioxx contributed
to his wife’s death and that Merck failed to provide consumers with
enough warning that the drug increased the risk of cardiovascular
problems. Schwaller had not had any heart attacks, strokes or symptoms
of congestive heart disease before her fatal collapse.
Merck pulled Vioxx off the market in 2004 after its research showed it increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes.
|
|
Woman can sue for abortion caused by accident
|
A pregnant woman – who claimed her decision to
undergo an abortion was the result of medical advice she received after
being injured in an auto accident – could sue for the wrongful death of
her fetus, according to a recent court ruling.
The woman suffered a broken pelvis when a car in
which she was a passenger was struck by another vehicle. She was three
months pregnant at the time.
Doctors advised the woman that she might not be able
to maintain the pregnancy because of her injuries. They also told her
that carrying the child to term could interfere with the healing of her
pelvis and prevent her from ever walking normally again.
The woman decided to have an abortion based on this information.
She later sued the driver of the other vehicle for negligence. The other driver
|
|
claimed he was not responsible for the abortion because it was a voluntary decision on her part.
But the Illinois Appellate Court disagreed.
The court ruled the driver’s alleged negligence put
the woman in the position of having to decide whether to carry the
fetus to term at the risk of permanent injury to herself. Her decision
to have the abortion was a foreseeable consequence of the auto
accident.
Consequently, she should be able to sue the man for
the wrongful death of her unborn child, and a jury should be able to
consider her case, according to the court.
Courts in Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, New Jersey and
New York have made similar decisions, while a Pennsylvania court
reached the opposite conclusion.
|
|
No tow warning results in $2.6M verdict
|
Three people injured in a roll-over accident while
towing a rented trailer won $2.6 million for their injuries because
U-Haul never gave them several warnings about the dangers of towing.
U-Haul’s company policy was to provide those warnings to customers.
Christian and Mindy Strong and their friend, Brian
Hunziker, were towing a rented motorcycle trailer when they had an
accident that caused their vehicle to roll.
Mindy Strong suffered a permanent back injury, as well as a major closed-head injury that caused permanent
|
|
memory and intellectual defects. Christian Strong broke both wrists, while Hunziker sustained minor injuries
No U-Haul agent ever told the Strongs they had to
drive 45 mph or less. Also, the safety decals providing this
information were so worn they couldn’t read them.
Jurors awarded Mindy Strong $2 million for her
injuries, Christian Strong $111,400 for his injuries and Hunziker
$41,000 for his injuries. Jurors also awarded the three punitive
damages of $441,600.
|
|
Me-OW! Cat bite leads to $122K verdict
|
When a Marine combat veteran wounded in Vietnam complains something hurts, chances are it hurts a lot.
Even if it’s a cat bite.
Michael Sabo lost three months wages and racked up
medical bills totaling $21,500 after his sister’s ornery cat chomped on
his finger while he was visiting his sister. The bite caused a severe
infection in his hand and arm. He spent three weeks in the hospital and
couldn’t go back to work for nearly two months.
His sister claimed the cat had never
|
|
bitten anyone before. But after hearing
evidence from family and friends – all of whom knew of the cat’s bad
temper – jurors returned from an hour of deliberations with a verdict
for Sabo totaling $122,500 for medical bills, lost wages and interest.
|
|
|
This newsletter is designed to keep you up-to-date with changes in the
law. For help with these or any other legal issues, please call our
firm today.
The information in this newsletter is intended solely for your
information. It does not constitute legal advice, and it should not be
relied on without a discussion of your specific situation with an
attorney.
|
|
