› $150,000,000 verdict in personal injury case
An activist and advocate for higher automobile roof strength standards believes that the federal government’s latest delay will ultimately benefit the consumer.
As we have reported in the past, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a branch of the Department of Transportation, decided in 2005 to boost its archaic standards for roof strength, issuing a deadline of mid-2008 to accomplish that.
In November, we reported that federal U.S. standards for vehicle roof safety were dangerously low, and that the decision to raise the standards, even just to a level still inferior to that of many foreign auto manufacturers, has been continually delayed. Then, just yesterday we speculated as to whether a bailout of the auto industry would mean better, safer American cars.
Unfortunately, it looks as if the Department of Transportation is just as dysfunctional as the American auto industry in its ability to do the right thing … or anything at all.
The safety problems that plagued the Ford Explorer and Bridgestone/Firestone tires earlier in the decade have resurfaced in court, according to the Southeast Texas Record.
Relatives of a man killed in a Ford Explorer accident in November 2005 are suing both Ford Motor Company and Bridgestone/Firestone as well as the driver of the Explorer, Ana Herrera.
Ricardo Garcia died of injuries he sustained when the 1998 Explorer he was a passenger in rolled over multiple times. The driver, Ana Herrera, lost control of the vehicle on an Arkansas road. Herrera’s Explorer rolled several times when she attempted to return the vehicle to the road.
In June, we reported that the U.S. Senate panel reviewing a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposal for increased standards in roof strength had asked the agency to delay its decision, originally scheduled for July 1. The NHTSA agreed to further review of the policy, and set a new date for release on Oct. 1. Yesterday, the agency announced another delay, pushing the decision back to December, according to a report in the Detroit News.
Under ride protection and cab guards are critical safety devices that are intended to minimize injury in the event of a collision. Unfortunately, a defect in design or materials can create a very dangerous situation.
Beasley Allen recently worked on a case in which three family members riding together in a Cadillac Escalade were killed when their vehicle struck a Nissan TX UD-1800 rollback wrecker vehicle that was jutting into a busy highway. Two other passengers in the vehicle were seriously injured.
Upon investigation, it was determined that the wrecker was not equipped with any under ride protection or guards, which would have helped rotate the Escalade away from the rollback in the event of a crash.
The parties eventually agreed to settle their claims, the terms of the settlement were confidential.
An under ride protection device extends below the trailer in order to prevent an automobile from riding under the trailer in the event of a rear impact.
Many heavy trucks and/or trailers are defectively designed in that the vehicles do not have proper under ride protection devices. When a vehicle is allowed to under ride a heavy truck trailer, it often results in severe injuries to vehicle occupants since passenger cars are substantially lower than the bed of heavy truck trailers.
When appropriate under ride guards are in place, vehicles are prevented from under riding these trailers and severe injuries that occur in foreseeable rear end collisions are substantially reduced.
Cab guards or “headache racks” are required as front-end structures on 18-wheelers that pull flat beds, trailers and log trailers and should function to prevent shifting cargo from contacting the cab of heavy trucks.
Many cab guards are designed of welded heat treated aluminum which results in a weakening of the cab guard over time. The weakening of the cab guard due to fatigue stress is relatively unknown to drivers.
Our research has shown that many welding requirements established by national organizations are not followed by cab guard manufacturers. The failure to follow such guidelines may result in poor welds, poor quality control, and poorly designed cab guards. These cab guard defects undermine the intended purpose of protecting truck occupants in an accident.
If your loved one has suffered a serious injury or death as a result of an under ride protection or cab guard defect injury, you may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, loss of wages, and pain and suffering.
Please contact our under ride protection lawyers today by filling out the brief questionnaire, or by calling our toll free number (1-800-898-2034) for a free, no-cost, no-obligation legal evaluation of your case.
Obviously, if an airbag fails to deploy, there may be an airbag claim.
However, there may be other types of airbag claims.
Aggressive airbags which deploy at excessive speeds can cause head or neck injuries or other broken bones. Children are especially susceptible to injuries and or death caused by an airbag. They should always been seated upright and as far away from an airbag as possible.
Late deploying airbags can fail to protect an occupant from contact with the interior of the vehicle, thus causing injuries that could have been avoided.
Airbags with a low deployment threshold can deploy at inopportune times in low speed impacts. These are often collisions that would have been injury free, if not for the airbag impacting the occupant.
There may be an airbag case if any of these factors apply:
If your loved one has suffered a serious injury or death as a result of an airbag defect injury, you may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, loss of wages, and pain and suffering.
Please contact our airbag defect lawyers today by filling out the brief questionnaire, or by calling our toll free number (1-800-898-2034) for a free, no-cost, no-obligation legal evaluation of your case.
To protect occupants in a rollover, maintaining survival space is very important. Survival space is the area around an occupant that remains free of intrusion in an accident. It is the area in which an occupant is able to “survive” the crash. The roof is part of the structural support of a vehicle and is therefore a critical component in keeping the occupant safe.
If a roof crushes substantially during an accident, from a failure of the side rails, headers or support pillars, catastrophic injuries can occur. Often, this decreased survival space results in the occupant’s head impacting some portion of the vehicle causing death, paralysis or brain damage. Sometimes, the occupant can even be partially ejected through an opening created during roof crush.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has proposed an upgrade Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 216 (FMVSS 216) would require that a roof withstand an applied force equal to 2.5 times the vehicle’s weight while maintaining sufficient headroom for an average size adult male. The current standard is 1.5 times the vehicle’s weight. Consumer groups, led by the People Safe in Rollovers Foundation, call for an even stronger standard of at least 3.5 times the vehicle’s weight.
The new standard also would for the first time extend roof strength standards to vehicles with gross weight ratings up to 10,000 pounds. The current standard applies only to vehicles with ratings up to 6,000 pounds, which means about 44 percent of the SUV and pickup fleets currently are exempt.
On September 30, 2003, a Nebraska jury awarded approximately $19.5 million to Penny Shipler, a 36-year-old mother left paralyzed from the neck down in a 1997 accident. She was a passenger in a 1996 Chevrolet Blazer when the vehicle was involved in an accident and rolled over. The roof crushed on Ms. Shipler causing her to suffer a complete spinal cord injury.
GM has known for many years that their roofs are too weak. Instead of making the roofs stronger, it relies on inadequate government standards that fail to require manufacturers to conduct dynamic rollover tests on their roofs. GM has failed to build its vehicles with sturdier roofs, and, as a result, people like Ms. Shipler continue to be severely injured or killed. What happened to her was foreseeable and certainly could have been avoided.
There may be a roof crush lawsuit if the roof has deformed or crushed or opened over the occupant’s head by deforming sideways.
If your loved one has suffered a serious injury or death as a result of roof crush injury, you may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, loss of wages, and pain and suffering.
Please contact our roof crush lawyers today by filling out the brief questionnaire, or by calling our toll free number (1-800-898-2034) for a free, no-cost, no-obligation legal evaluation of your case.
A U.S. Senate panel recommended Wednesday that a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposal on vehicle roof strength requirements be amended so that it does not limit the ability of plaintiffs to sue automakers in roof crush cases, according to an Associated Press report.
A Senate hearing on roof crush strength and related driver and passenger safety in vehicle rollover accidents is set for Wednesday, June 4, from 10-11:30 a.m. ET in room 253, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. Sen. Mark Pryor, chairman of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Automotive Safety, called for the hearing after meeting with representatives from non-profit citizen action group People Safe In Rollovers Foundation.
Since his son Tyler’s death, Kevin Moody has been on a mission to get the roof strength standard, FMVSS 216, upgraded and convince Congress to pass new legislation regulating and mandating a new and adequate roof strength standard beyond what NHTSA, (National Highway Transportation Safety Administration) has proposed.
![[ Beasley Allen Law Firm Logo ]](/wp-content/themes/system-unity/images/logo.png){kind=logo}