Who's liable
01-30-2003, 01:08 PM
#3
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2000
Location: where the weather suits my clothes
Age: 55
Posts: 27,921
Received 1,080 Likes
on
661 Posts
Good luck to you. Product liability is one of the hardest cases to prove. Shyne, a member of this board is involved in such a case.
I'm sure Acura has been planning for that day for a long time.
I'm sure Acura has been planning for that day for a long time.
01-30-2003, 04:04 PM
#4
Three Wheelin'
i disagree. it would be easy to pin the liability onto Acura. As a rule, subsequent remedial measures cannot be used as an admission of guilt on the public policy theory that no one would ever fix a f-ck up if they could be hung by thier own actions to remedy a problem. However, here Acura hasnt taken any remedial measures to correct the problem. Sure they have redesigned the clutch pack but thats not considered a remedial measure. By contrast, lets just say you were walking on a boardwalk and you fell through a rotten wooden board. The next morning the hotel sends a worker out to replace the board. The fact that the board was replaced with pressure treated lumber could not be used as an admission that the first piece of wood, just regular old pine, was inadequate and should never have been used near the ocean salt water.
Here, Acura knows there is a higher than normal rate of failure and they also know the risk posed by a tranny failing while the car is being driven. Yet they disregard the risk and do nothing except that they will agree to fix it after it fails, for a longer period of time. About their only defense would be if you were speeding at the time, they might be able to argue that you were contributorily negligent in that your injuries would have not occurred, or been less severe had you obeyed the speed limit at the time of the tranny failure and accident. Depending on the state, contributory negligence might decrease the total amount of a judgment award.
For Strict Product Liability, you do not need to prove fault, just that there was a defective design or a failure to adequately warn, and that design or inaction causes injury. For negligence you have to show a duty, a breach of duty, causation, and harm. Under either legal theory, Acura is gonna pay if the suits start rolling in. Because dont forget that in additional to the above, Acura sells throughout the US so to some extent you may also have the ability to pick a state to sue where there is a sympathetic jury => Punitive damages <= Huge cash judgment.
Here, Acura knows there is a higher than normal rate of failure and they also know the risk posed by a tranny failing while the car is being driven. Yet they disregard the risk and do nothing except that they will agree to fix it after it fails, for a longer period of time. About their only defense would be if you were speeding at the time, they might be able to argue that you were contributorily negligent in that your injuries would have not occurred, or been less severe had you obeyed the speed limit at the time of the tranny failure and accident. Depending on the state, contributory negligence might decrease the total amount of a judgment award.
For Strict Product Liability, you do not need to prove fault, just that there was a defective design or a failure to adequately warn, and that design or inaction causes injury. For negligence you have to show a duty, a breach of duty, causation, and harm. Under either legal theory, Acura is gonna pay if the suits start rolling in. Because dont forget that in additional to the above, Acura sells throughout the US so to some extent you may also have the ability to pick a state to sue where there is a sympathetic jury => Punitive damages <= Huge cash judgment.
01-30-2003, 04:58 PM
#5
Ok!
so let say if you're doing 85 on the freeway and suddenly the tranny decides to blow. You lost control, and hit the jersey wall and break ur neck.
If you can prove that the car tranny failure had caused the accident then Acura is definitely responsible for it .
so let say if you're doing 85 on the freeway and suddenly the tranny decides to blow. You lost control, and hit the jersey wall and break ur neck.
If you can prove that the car tranny failure had caused the accident then Acura is definitely responsible for it .
01-30-2003, 05:07 PM
#6
Drifting
Originally posted by 2002acuraTL
i disagree. it would be easy to pin the liability onto Acura. As a rule, subsequent remedial measures cannot be used as an admission of guilt on the public policy theory that no one would ever fix a f-ck up if they could be hung by thier own actions to remedy a problem. However, here Acura hasnt taken any remedial measures to correct the problem. Sure they have redesigned the clutch pack but thats not considered a remedial measure. By contrast, lets just say you were walking on a boardwalk and you fell through a rotten wooden board. The next morning the hotel sends a worker out to replace the board. The fact that the board was replaced with pressure treated lumber could not be used as an admission that the first piece of wood, just regular old pine, was inadequate and should never have been used near the ocean salt water.
Here, Acura knows there is a higher than normal rate of failure and they also know the risk posed by a tranny failing while the car is being driven. Yet they disregard the risk and do nothing except that they will agree to fix it after it fails, for a longer period of time. About their only defense would be if you were speeding at the time, they might be able to argue that you were contributorily negligent in that your injuries would have not occurred, or been less severe had you obeyed the speed limit at the time of the tranny failure and accident. Depending on the state, contributory negligence might decrease the total amount of a judgment award.
For Strict Product Liability, you do not need to prove fault, just that there was a defective design or a failure to adequately warn, and that design or inaction causes injury. For negligence you have to show a duty, a breach of duty, causation, and harm. Under either legal theory, Acura is gonna pay if the suits start rolling in. Because dont forget that in additional to the above, Acura sells throughout the US so to some extent you may also have the ability to pick a state to sue where there is a sympathetic jury => Punitive damages <= Huge cash judgment.
i disagree. it would be easy to pin the liability onto Acura. As a rule, subsequent remedial measures cannot be used as an admission of guilt on the public policy theory that no one would ever fix a f-ck up if they could be hung by thier own actions to remedy a problem. However, here Acura hasnt taken any remedial measures to correct the problem. Sure they have redesigned the clutch pack but thats not considered a remedial measure. By contrast, lets just say you were walking on a boardwalk and you fell through a rotten wooden board. The next morning the hotel sends a worker out to replace the board. The fact that the board was replaced with pressure treated lumber could not be used as an admission that the first piece of wood, just regular old pine, was inadequate and should never have been used near the ocean salt water.
Here, Acura knows there is a higher than normal rate of failure and they also know the risk posed by a tranny failing while the car is being driven. Yet they disregard the risk and do nothing except that they will agree to fix it after it fails, for a longer period of time. About their only defense would be if you were speeding at the time, they might be able to argue that you were contributorily negligent in that your injuries would have not occurred, or been less severe had you obeyed the speed limit at the time of the tranny failure and accident. Depending on the state, contributory negligence might decrease the total amount of a judgment award.
For Strict Product Liability, you do not need to prove fault, just that there was a defective design or a failure to adequately warn, and that design or inaction causes injury. For negligence you have to show a duty, a breach of duty, causation, and harm. Under either legal theory, Acura is gonna pay if the suits start rolling in. Because dont forget that in additional to the above, Acura sells throughout the US so to some extent you may also have the ability to pick a state to sue where there is a sympathetic jury => Punitive damages <= Huge cash judgment.
01-30-2003, 05:10 PM
#7
Drifting
Originally posted by this is me
Ok!
so let say if you're doing 85 on the freeway and suddenly the tranny decides to blow. You lost control, and hit the jersey wall and break ur neck.
If you can prove that the car tranny failure had caused the accident then Acura is definitely responsible for it .
Ok!
so let say if you're doing 85 on the freeway and suddenly the tranny decides to blow. You lost control, and hit the jersey wall and break ur neck.
If you can prove that the car tranny failure had caused the accident then Acura is definitely responsible for it .
Trending Topics
01-30-2003, 09:30 PM
#8
Three Wheelin'
Yes, I am General Counsel to a mid-sized multinational corporation.
The final measure of damages is always up to a jury. SInce I was not injured when my tranny went, about the most i could go after Acura for at the moment is negligent infliction of emotional distress. Thats not to say that i am going to just walk away from this matter. I am composing letters that will be addressed to the President of American Honda Motors, ans well as to their law department which will demand that they issue a recall for numerous reasons including the damage to the company's reputation that is occuring from their inaction. A damaged reputation equals lower sales and a dimunition in share holder stock value. Decreased stock value as a result of poor business choices made by the board of a company equals shareholder derivative lawsuits. These are things Honda's top brass needs to think about, their own personal liability, since they dont seem to give a damb about customers safety.
The final measure of damages is always up to a jury. SInce I was not injured when my tranny went, about the most i could go after Acura for at the moment is negligent infliction of emotional distress. Thats not to say that i am going to just walk away from this matter. I am composing letters that will be addressed to the President of American Honda Motors, ans well as to their law department which will demand that they issue a recall for numerous reasons including the damage to the company's reputation that is occuring from their inaction. A damaged reputation equals lower sales and a dimunition in share holder stock value. Decreased stock value as a result of poor business choices made by the board of a company equals shareholder derivative lawsuits. These are things Honda's top brass needs to think about, their own personal liability, since they dont seem to give a damb about customers safety.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cycdaniel
1G TSX Performance Parts & Modifications
8
12-17-2019 10:58 AM
