1993 Nissan Pathfinder Inadequate Rollover Warning-www.dy2018.net

UnCategorized In 1997, Andrea Alvarez was driving her 1993 Nissan Pathfinder on a highway in Broward County, Florida. When Alvarez inadvertently veered off the road into the center median, she steered to re-enter the roadway, but lost control and rolled over onto the driver’s side. During the accident, Alvarez suffered a life altering injury-her left arm was amputated at the elbow. The Alvarezes filed suit against Nissan, alleging that a design defect caused the Nissan Pathfinder to be unreasonably dangerous and that Nissan’s failed in its duty to use reasonable care in the design, manufacture, assembly, distribution, and/or sale of its vehicle. Nissan, it was alleged, was also negligent in that it failed to give proper warnings to car buyers concerning the vehicle’s dangerous susceptibility to "rollovers." The Alvarezes presented expert testimony, including various tests that supported their contention that the Pathfinder was unreasonably dangerous. Nissan countered, presenting its own expert witnesses and evidence that the vehicle did not have a design defect. The automaker insisted that Alvarez caused the accident by incorrectly steering the Pathfinder, saying that no SUV can be designed so that it does not overturn just from steering. Alvaraz’s attorneys insisted that vehicles should and can be designed not to overturn solely based on a driver’s steering while on a flat, level, paved roadway. Nissan claimed that the Pathfinder’s wheels were off the road when Alvaraz turned over. The plaintiff maintained that she tipped over while on the road and that all four tires were in contact with the road when she turned over. "Nissan"s own engineers contradicted the automakers assertion," noted nationally recognized auto defects attorney, John Bisnar. "A paper presented at a conference by Japanese Nissan engineers in the 1970s included an experimental safety project that stated the Nissan vehicle ‘has over-turning immunity.’ The paper proved that Nissan was aware that a vehicle could be designed so it wouldn’t roll over based on how it was driven." Plaintiffs’ experts, including an engineer and a test-driver, proved that the 1993 Pathfinder could roll over based on how it was driven. They presented their own rollover tests. Going a step further, they modified the SUV with a wider track and a lowered center of gravity, which during tests, revealed that the SUV did not roll over. Although the jury found there was no design defect, it did find that Nissan was negligent in its "failure to warn," which does not require a finding of design defect. The trial court agreed with the Alvarezes. In addition, the jury found that Andrea Alvarez was .paratively negligent and assigned her 49 percent fault and Nissan 51% fault. Alvarez was awarded damages of $3,057,000 and her husband was awarded $415,000. The trial court entered a Final Judgment in accordance with the jury verdict. "How many serious, life-altering injuries must the motoring public endure before a car maker finally decides to adequately warn its publics about the dangers of its SUVs?" exclaimed Brian Chase of the nationally recognized auto defects law firm of Bisnar Chase. "The Alvarezes’ action in taking Nissan to court is an example of our justice system at work. The jury’s award is America’s message to Nissan that their failure to act was not acceptable. Hopefully, this lawsuit will help convince Nissan to properly warn customers about the potential risks in driving rollover-prone SUVs. We extend our deepest sympathies to Andrea Alvarez for all the pain and injuries she has suffered. We wish her well. Case details courtesy of Rominger Legal Research and Justice for all files About the Author: 相关的主题文章: