Practice Areas: Product & Consumer Litigation

Automotive Products Liability

We regularly defend automotive manufacturers at trial and on appeal in state and federal courts across the country in products liability cases involving a range of automotive components and defect theories. Our automotive products liability team handles cases involving passenger cars, light trucks, sport utility vehicles, vans and motorcycles. We are national trial counsel to a leading U.S. automobile manufacturer, and have tried cases to verdict in numerous states.

We defend automotive products liability cases with the same passion and conviction our automotive clients exercise when they design and manufacture their products. This dedication has enabled us to represent several of the largest automobile manufacturers in a variety of litigated areas. It has also allowed us to serve as national counsel for two of the nation’s largest domestic automobile manufacturers.

We also provide national discovery coordination, and create nationally consistent discovery responses for clients; routinely coordinate large document productions, including document sweeps; and manage large document repositories. We keep abreast of the latest National Highway Traffic Safety Administration dockets, and work with clients in formulating responses to NHTSA inquiries and requests for comment. We focus on pattern litigation, and work with clients to develop broad-based defenses to pattern claims.

Recent Representative Matters

• Defense at trial of an automobile manufacturer in a wrongful death case tried in Louisville, Ky. Plaintiff was seated in the front passenger seat, unbelted. She was ejected and crushed between the vehicle and a concrete barrier. Plaintiff contended the car’s door lock and latching systems were defective, allowing the door to open in the crash. After a two-week trial, the jury deliberated for just 45 minutes before returning a verdict for our client, finding there was no defect.
• Defense at trial of an automobile manufacturer in a wrongful death case tried in the Southern District of New York. Driver was ejected in a multiple rollover collision. Plaintiff contended that the car’s door latching and restraint systems were defective, allowing the door to open in the crash. After a two-week trial, the jury returned a verdict for our client, finding there was no defect.
• Defense at trial of an automobile manufacturer in a wrongful death action tried in Lowndes County, Miss. In March 1999, an intoxicated man was involved in a head-on collision after driving on the wrong side of the road. A post-collision fire ensued in his vehicle. He was trapped in the vehicle, sustained severe burn injuries before he was extricated, and died approximately one month later. The other driver died at the scene. Claiming damages, the driver’s relatives filed an action against our client, alleging that a design defect in the car’s fuel lines allowed it to be breached in the impact, leading to a fuel-fed fire. Following a two-week trial, the jury returned a verdict for our client, finding there were no defects in the fuel system’s design.
• Defense at trial of an automobile manufacturer in a wrongful death action tried in Chambers County, Ala. Plaintiff was seated in the front seat, double belted with his 6-year-old stepsister. The airbags deployed, and plaintiff was killed when his mother rear-ended a car, allegedly at a speed of 5 mph. Defendant contended the impact speed was 18 mph, but there was little visible damage to the plaintiff’s car. Plaintiff alleged that a defect in the airbag sensor system caused the airbags to improperly deploy in a low-speed impact. After a two-week trail, the jury deliberated for six hours, before returning a unanimous defense verdict.
• Defense at trial of an automobile manufacturer in a wrongful death case tried in Jackson County, Mo. Plaintiff was rendered a paraplegic in a rollover accident. He later died from related injuries. Plaintiff’s counsel alleged handling and stability defects, and roof strength defects. This was a high profile case, and the resulting defense verdict was publicized throughout the United States.
• Defense at trial of an automobile manufacturer in a wrongful death action tried in Adams County, Miss. Plaintiff was operating an automobile on a rural highway when he lost control of his vehicle, left the roadway, and crashed into an earthen berm. A fire ensued. Unable to escape from his vehicle, plaintiff died at the scene. Plaintiff’s counsel alleged various defects in the automobile, including the fuel system, door latch, and structural design defects. After a three-week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.
• Defense at trial of an automobile manufacturer. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit affirmed summary judgment for defendant in a published opinion dated Jan. 16, 2008. Plaintiffs brought the lawsuit against the automobile manufacturer in 2001, alleging that the automobile manufacturer fraudulently induced plaintiffs to settle a wrongful death claim in 1999. In the underlying wrongful death case, plaintiffs claimed that a defective design caused the automobile to roll over during an accident, and crush the decedent. Plaintiffs asserted that the wrongful death case would have settled for $10 million, if the defendant had provided complete discovery responses and sought to recover the difference between the actual settlement and their $10 million figure. The 5th Circuit determined that plaintiffs should have returned the settlement proceeds to the defendant, if they were unhappy with the settlement, and then litigated the original wrongful death case. Plaintiffs’ failure to do so precluded any subsequent litigation.