Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
P, a police officer, was seriously injured as a result of an automobile accident. P was driving on a rain-soaked highway, and lost control of his patrol car a 1974 Dodge Monaco. The car slid off the highway, over a curb, through a small sign, and into an unyielding steel pole that was fifteen inches in diameter. The vehicle literally wrapped itself around the pole. The pole ripped through the body of the car and crushed P between the seat and the 'header' area of the roof, located just above the windshield. The automobile dislocated P's left hip and ruptured his fifth and sixth cervical vertebrae. As a result of the injuries, P is now a quadriplegic. He has no control over his body from the neck down and requires constant medical attention. P sued D. P's claims were based on strict products liability and breach of implied warranty of fitness. P alleged that the patrol car was defective because it did not have a full, continuous steel frame extending through the door panels, and a cross-member running through the floorboard between the posts located between the front and rear doors of the vehicle. Had the vehicle been so designed it would have 'bounced' off the pole following relatively slight penetration by the pole into the passenger space. Expert testimony was introduced to prove that the existing frame of the patrol car was unable to withstand side impacts at relatively low speed, and that the inadequacy of the frame permitted the pole to enter the passenger area and to injure P. The experts testified that the improvements in the design of the frame were feasible and would have prevented the injury. D argued that it had no duty to produce a 'crashproof' vehicle, and that, in any event, the patrol car was not defective. D established that the design and construction of the 1974 Dodge Monaco complied with all federal vehicle safety standards and that deformation of the body of the vehicle is desirable in most crashes because it absorbs the impact of the crash and decreases the rate of deceleration on the occupants of the vehicle. D's experts asserted that, for most types of automobile accidents, the design offered by P would be less safe than the existing design. They also estimated that the steel parts that would be required in the model suggested by P would have added between 200 and 250 pounds to the weight, and approximately $300 to the price of the vehicle. It was also established that the 1974 Dodge Monaco's unibody construction was stronger than comparable Ford and Chevrolet vehicles. D moved for a directed verdict, and it was denied. P got the jury verdict and awarded P $2,064,863.19 for his expenses, disability, and pain and suffering, and granted $60,000.00 for loss of consortium and loss of services to P's wife. D moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, alternatively for a new trial. They were denied. D appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co