   |
||||||||||
 |
|
 |
2008 News Releases Locke Reynolds Obtains Judgment for Ford in Child Airbag Case INDIANAPOLIS, January 2008 – An Indianapolis, Indiana, trial court entered final judgment for Ford Motor Company on January 15, 2008, in a case alleging airbag-related defects causing injury to an eight year old child in a 1997 Ford F-150 truck. Locke Reynolds attorneys Kevin C. Schiferl and Matthew R. King represented Ford as trial counsel, along with Patrick X. Fowler and Jeffrey C. Warren from Snell & Wilmer (Phoenix, Arizona). On April 20, 2002, Lori Cook drove her 1997 Ford F-150 4x4 Super Cab with her eight year old daughter in the right front passenger seat. Mrs. Cook believed her daughter was wearing her seatbelt, but at the time of the accident she was not belted. A vehicle stopped in front of Lori's truck and she applied her brakes, but she struck the back of the other vehicle. Both the driver and passenger air bags deployed. As Lori applied the brakes, her daughter was thrown forward, and her head was against the air bag door when the air bag deployed. As a result, she sustained a skull fracture and severe brain injury. Plaintiffs alleged their daughter's injuries were caused by design defects and warning defects in the F-150. Plaintiffs claimed the air bag in the F-150 inflated with excessive force and the air bag sensors were designed to deploy at dangerously low speeds. Plaintiffs also claimed the warnings associated with the passenger air bag on/off switch were defective. Ford argued the 1997 F-150 provided a safe, reliable and effective occupant crash protection system and these injuries occurred because the child was not belted. Ford emphasized Lori Cook knew children and adults could be seriously injured if they were close to the air bag when it deployed. Ford also argued the child would not have suffered these injuries if Lori Cook had kept her in the back seat as Ford recommends in its owner's manual. In February 2007, after eight days at trial consisting entirely of plaintiffs' case-in-chief, Ford moved for directed verdict and a mistrial after plaintiffs' counsel conceded he did not put on sufficient evidence to support any aspect of an airbag inflator claim. The judge granted the mistrial and set the case to be tried again, 11 months later. Before the second trial, Ford moved for, and obtained, summary judgment on plaintiffs' defective warnings claim. Ford's argument was primarily based on Mr. Cook's admission he read only one page of the F-150 Owner's Manual. On the day before the second trial, the court granted Ford's oral motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs' air bag inflator claim. The court had ordered plaintiffs to present evidence on this previously-abandoned air bag claim, and when plaintiffs presented only minimal evidence and no specific expert testimony, Ford successfully argued for summary judgment. After the court granted judgment on the second of plaintiffs' three claims, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their third and final defect claim—the air bag sensor magnet—and announced their intent to appeal the judgments on their other two claims. The trial court then entered a three-page final judgment order in Ford's favor. Plaintiffs recently initiated an appeal of Ford's judgments with Indiana's Court of Appeals.
|
Contact: Locke Reynolds LLP Fort Wayne, Indiana |
||||||||
 |
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
Locke Reynolds LLP. Copyright 2008. All rights reserved. |
||||||||||