Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Silhadi was driving home in his Volkswagen Jetta at approximately 35 miles per hour. The Jetta left an exit ramp and collided with a steel utility pole. Silhadi died as a result of his injuries--fractures of the ribs, rupture of the liver and massive internal hemorrhaging. Silhadi's blood alcohol content exceeded legal limits. His widow (P) commenced this action against D to recover damages on the theory that a defect in the vehicle's design enhanced the injuries. D moved for summary judgment in that Silhadi's intoxication was the sole cause of the crash and that no defect or malfunction in the Jetta caused or contributed to it. P's expert asserted that due to structural deficiencies in the manufacture of the vehicle, its floorboard buckled upward during the collision; the vehicle did not have adequate subframe reinforcement, and that the resultant buckling caused the decedent to be thrown forward, causing thoracic and abdominal injuries that led to his death. The expert concluded that if the vehicle had safety features which were readily available and in common use in the automobile industry Silhadi would have survived the crash with minimal injury. The Supreme Court granted D's motion on its finding that decedent's drunk driving constituted a serious violation of the law and that his injuries were the direct result of that violation. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding only that 'the negligent manner in which the decedent was operating his vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the collision and his fatal injuries.' P appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co