Camacho v. Honda Motor Co., Ltd.,

741 P. 2d 1240, cert. dismissed 485 U.S. 901 (1987)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P purchased a new 1978 Honda Hawk motorcycle. while driving the motorcycle through an intersection, P collided with an automobile and sustained serious leg injuries. P’s Honda Hawk motorcycle was unequipped with crash bars. P and his wife filed an action against D seeking damages for personal injuries, property losses, loss of consortium and exemplary damages. The action was based on several theories, including strict liability. P alleged that the motorcycle was a defectively designed, unreasonably dangerous product under the Restatement (Second) of Torts section 402A because it was not equipped with 'crash bars' -- tubular steel bars attached to the motorcycle frame to protect the rider's legs in the event of a collision. P claims that if such crash bars had been installed on the motorcycle, his leg injuries would have been mitigated. Depositions from mechanical engineers revealed that effective leg protection devices were available at the time of the purchase and that several other manufacturers had made such devices available as optional equipment. D moved for summary judgment, arguing that as a matter of law a motorcycle lacking crash bars cannot be deemed unreasonably dangerous. The trial court granted the motion, concluding that (1) because the danger of leg injury was obvious and foreseeable, D had no duty to totally alter the nature of its product by installing crash bars; and (2) D had no duty under the crashworthiness doctrine to add a safety feature to its product to reduce the severity of injuries resulting from accidents. The trial court was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. P appealed.