Crashworthiness Litigation: Recognizing the Automotive Design Defect Case

Crashworthiness Litigation: Recognizing the Automotive Design Defect Case
by Paul J. Komyatte and James L. Gilbert

• On a Sunday afternoon, the V family's minivan is hit in the side by a full size van. The minivan's side panel is sheared off and the two rear bench seats are ripped from the floor and ejected through the liftgate opening, along with the V family's three young girls who are seatbelted to the bench seats. All three girls are killed. The occupants of the larger van are not seriously injured.
  
• M is seated in the back seat of a compact wagon that is hit in the rear by a slightly larger vehicle. The floor pan of M's car buckles upward, shoving M's seat toward the roof as much as seven inches. M's head is pushed into the roof and his neck is broken, rendering him quadriplegic. The two front seat occupants are not injured. 
  
• J and his sister are returning home one evening in a "converted" minivan containing captain chairs and other luxury upgrades. When a smaller vehicle hits the minivan head-on, the captain chairs break loose from the floor and the seat belts rip, allowing J to impact the steering wheel with tremendous force. J is now brain damaged and quadriplegic. The driver of the smaller vehicle is not seriously injured. 
  
• L is driving a sport utility vehicle that hits black ice and slides off the road, rolling several times. The roof crushes in a "V" pattern directly over L's head, breaking her neck and rendering her quadriplegic. L's two passengers are not injured. 
  
• S is driving his sport utility vehicle when a dog runs into the road. S swerves to miss the dog, and his vehicle rolls over while it is still on the smooth, dry roadway. S is ejected and killed. 
  

These individuals were all involved in accidents where the real tort-feasor was not present at the accident scene and (in the first four instances) played no role in causing the accident. Though not present at the accident scene, this "missing defendant" played a major role in the ensuing deaths and injuries. This defendant is the auto manufacturer – the company that designed the vehicle, tested it, certified it as meeting federal safety standards, and above all, knew it would be involved in real world accidents and knew how it would perform in those accidents. 

Despite steady advances being made in auto safety, automobile defects are still widespread. Most Americans are familiar with the more notorious vehicles, such as the Pinto, but few realize the nature and scope of the problem. Millions of defective vehicles remain on America’s roads, capable of causing death and severe injuries in otherwise survivable accidents. 
For over thirty years, the courts have allowed consumers to sue carmakers when a design or manufacturing defect in their vehicle caused death or injury. The crashworthiness doctrine recognizes that collisions are "statistically inevitable" and that car manufacturers have a duty to eliminate unreasonable risks of harm during accidents. The focus in a crashworthiness case is not on the cause of the accident (which is presumed) but, rather, what caused the injury. 

Any automobile accident case involving death or serious injury should be evaluated for a potential product liability claim. While many deaths and injuries are due to the violent forces involved in car accidents, many are preventable and occur only because of vehicle defects. In a case involving death or catastrophic injury, the available insurance coverage is likely to fall short of the client's damages. A product case, if available, might be the only hope at full compensation. 

Principles of Crashworthiness

During a collision, occupants are subject to potentially injurious forces, including rapid deceleration (in frontal impacts) and rapid acceleration (in rear and side impacts). A crashworthy design seeks to minimize the damaging effects of these forces by distributing them over as great a period of time and distance as possible and by directing them to parts of the body more capable of withstanding them. In broad terms, crashworthy designs encompass the following five principles:

1. Minimization of Intrusion. A safe design should minimize passenger compartment intrusion. In rear impacts, crush should be designed to occur behind the rear axle. In frontal impacts, crush should occur in front of the dash and steering column, and the steering column should not intrude toward the occupant. In rollovers, the roof and supporting structures should not crush onto an occupant's head and neck. 
   
2. Effective Restraint System. The restraint system should "tie" the occupant to the passenger compartment, preventing injurious contacts with the vehicle interior and allowing him or her to safely "ride down" the crash. 
   
3. Prevention of Ejection. Ejection greatly increases the odds of death or serious injury. A safe vehicle should therefore be designed so that doors and liftgates stay shut, seat belts remain latched, and large portals or openings are not created during accidents. 
   
4. "Friendly Interiors." Vehicle interiors should be designed to absorb destructive accident forces. The use of smooth surfaces, padding and collapsible steering columns can minimize the injurious effects of head and body contact with the vehicle interior. 
   
5. Fuel System Integrity. A safe design must minimize the risk of fuel fed fires. If an occupant can survive a collision and its crash forces without serious skeletal or internal injuries, the fuel system should similarly remain secure and intact.

Next Page - >

© Gilbert, Frank, Ollanik and Komyatte, P.C., 2000, reprinted with permission.  
For more information about Gilbert, Frank, Ollanik and Komyatte, see their website at http://www.auto-law.com.