California Personal Injury Law Case Notes : California Personal Injury Lawyer & Attorney : Kristine Meredith : The Danko Law Firm : Car Accidents & Product Liability

Where will the San Bruno fire cases be heard? This morning, Judge Forcum ruled that all of the cases should be heard by one judge, and that judge should be in San Mateo County. That was no surprise. Now, it’s up to the Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court to approve Judge Forcum’s ruling. When she does that (and there’s little question that she will), a judge will be selected from the San Mateo bench to handle all the cases. We’re expecting a judge to be picked within the next three weeks.  Until then, the PG&E cases remain at a standstill.

One of the lawsuits that Judge Forcum ordered coordinated with all the others was a lawsuit brought by PG&E shareholders against PG&E management. The shareholders claim that management knew about the problems with the pipeline and did nothing to stop the explosion from happening. By allowing the explosion, the lawsuit claims, management hurt the price of PG&E’s stock.

The only argument at today’s hearing centered around that case. PG&E argued that that the shareholder lawsuit should not be coordinated with the others because the questions in that case have little to do with those in the personal injury suits. Therefore, PG&E argued, they should not be all lumped together. Judge Forcum disagreed. The shareholder suit is all about what PG&E management knew about the dangers and when they knew it. But that question is also important in the personal injury lawsuits because it may determine whether PG&E should be liable to the San Bruno residents for punitive damages.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Does the recent NASA report spell trouble for the plaintiffs' attorneys in the Toyota Unintended Acceleration Litigation?

No. Electronic malfunction was not the sole theory relied upon by victims of unintended acceleration. The strategy in most product defect litigation is (1) identify an aspect of the products design that caused the injury; and (2) show that there was a reasonably feasible alternative design that would have prevented the injury. If the victims can prove those two things, then the product was defective.

Here, Toyota has identified at least two known aspects of the vehicle's design that can cause SUA: (1) floor mat interference with the throttle pedal; and (2) “sticky” throttle pedals. Safety advocates, industry experts, and (yes) plaintiffs in Toyota suits have identified a third: electronic malfunction.

All three of the possible design issues could have been prevented by Toyota installing a brake override system. Regardless of which design problem is ultimately proven responsible for SUA, the brake override system solves the problem.

Toyota could have implemented a brake override system for less than $1 per vehicle, but it didn’t. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Your tire is losing air. You drive to the gas station and learn you've "picked up a nail." The guy says he can fix the tire in 10 minutes with a "plug." He doesn't even have to take the tire off the rim. Ten bucks. Wow. Sounds pretty good. And what's the worse thing that can happen if it doesn't work? It'll leak again, right?

Actually, an improper patch or plug repair can cause the tire tread to peel off the tire. That, in turn, can cause the vehicle to become uncontrollable, leading to the most dangerous type of accident there is -- a rollover. And it happens more often than you'd think.

The weak part of the tire is where the steel belts bond with the tire's shoulder. An improper "on the wheel" repair can allow moisture to get to the steel belts and weaken the bond. That's what causes the detread. The three things to remember are:

1. No on-the-rim repairs. The tire must be dismounted so that the tire can be properly inspected and sealed against moisture. If the guy at the garage says he can fix the tire without taking it off the rim, he isn't doing you a favor. He is putting you and your family at risk.

2. No repairs near the shoulder. The shoulder of the tire is the weakest part.  So only those holes in the middle of the tire can be repaired.  If you pick up a nail near the shoulder, you need a new tire.

3. If you decide to get a new tire, the new tread must go on the rear axle. Installing the new tread on the front axle can lead to a loss of control and rollover for reasons unrelated to tread separation.

Gas station mechanics are supposed to know better. That's their job. But many don't.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

What, exactly, does the the widely publicized NASA report say about whether Toyota's unintended acceleration problems are caused by faulty electronics? According to DOT Secretary Ray LaHood, the NASA report concludes that there is "no electronic-based cause for unintended high-speed acceleration."

But the consumer group Safety Research & Strategies, Inc. does not believe the NASA engineers go that far.  It quotes the report:

Due to system complexity which will be described and the many possible electronic software and hardware systems interactions it is not realistic to prove that the ETCSi cannot cause UAs. Today’s vehicles are sufficiently complex that no reasonable amount of analysis or testing can prove electronics and software have no errors. Therefore, absence of proof that the ETCSi caused a UA does not vindicate the system.”

In effect, NASA leaves itself some wiggle room by saying: We cannot prove that the electronic system caused the errors; but the lack of proof does not mean the system is error-free.

Looks as though consumers will need turn to plaintiffs' attorneys to identify the cause of the defective acceleration system.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link