Head and brain injuries are major causes of death. Blunt force to the head can cause the brain to bounce against the inner wall of the skull. As a result, the brain is injured and loose function. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that each year, 1. 7 million people suffer from a traumatic brain injury (TBI). And among that group, 52,000 people in the United States die each year from this type of injury. A TBI, which can range in its severity, can cause permanent disability including speech impairment and neurocognitive defects. Although falls are the leading causes of a TBI, motor-vehicle traffic injuries is the leading cause of a TBI related death, and these rates are highest among adults between the ages of 20 to 24 years of age, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In February, a Delray police sergeant suffered traumatic injury to his head and was killed during a one car crash. According to the Sun Sentinel, a final investigation of this horrific crash determined that Sergeant Adam Rosenthal had been running late for an early morning shift, was speeding at 70 mph and was not wearing his seatbelt. After losing control of the police vehicle he drove that morning, his car begun “yawning back and forth” on the roadway and ultimately the passenger side of the vehicle struck a tree. The speed limit for the curved section on the highway which he traveled is 45 mph. A later autopsy report concluded that he died from blunt force trauma to the head.
It is also believed that Rosenthal may have been distracted by his patrol car’s computer, as reported by the Sun Sentinel. However, based upon the final investigation, the computer indicated that his seat belt was not buckled during the crash. Our Fort Lauderdale car accident attorneys send our sincere condolences to his family.
Nevertheless, when people are hurt or killed during an automobile accident, an investigation is usually conducted to determine whether or not the vehicle has held up according to the manufacturers’ safety standards. Our Fort Lauderdale injury attorneys recognize that the performance of the vehicle is an important factor in evaluating a cause of death or injury during a motor vehicle collision. If it is determined that the automobile had a performance defect, a vehicle manufacturer could be held liable by failing to provide vehicle occupants safe protection in the event of a motor vehicle crash, based upon the legal doctrine of crashworthiness.
Basically, under this doctrine, a manufacturer of a motor vehicle could be liable if it is determined that the airbags of the vehicle were defect, or did not deploy correctly at the time of the crash. Additionally, until recently, comparative fault was not an issue in claims involving crashworthiness. Comparative fault, or comparative negligence, is a defense in which defendants claim that a plaintiff in a motor vehicle negligence action was partially at fault for causing the accident.
There is Florida case law history on the issue of crashworthiness and comparative fault. In 1968, in Larsen v. General Motors [391 F2d 495], the Court determined that manufacturers are responsible for making their vehicles as reasonably safe as possible in the event of a collision and liable for damages a person sustains during an automobile crash. However, in 2001, the Supreme Court ruled that vehicle manufacturers are only responsible for enhanced injuries, in D’Amario vs. Ford Motor Company [806 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 2001)].
Basically, in D’Amario, the Court ruled that under the theory of recovery involving crashworthiness, a plaintiff could recover for a secondary injury caused by a manufacturer’s defective product. Secondary injuries are additional injuries which result after an initial accident. For example, in D’Amario, the plaintiff was a minor passenger in a motor vehicle that had struck a tree. Subsequently, a fire engulfed and the minor plaintiff suffered serious personal injuries including burns and the loss of three limbs. Moreover, minor plaintiff sued the Ford Motor Company and argued that Ford had manufactured a defective relay switch on the vehicle in which he was a passenger, and but for Ford’s negligence, he would not have been injured. He argued that the defective relay switch caused the fire.
However, Ford defended and argued that it was the initial impact which was caused by the negligence of an alleged intoxicated and speeding driver of the vehicle, and not the relay switch. But, the minor plaintiff argued that he was not seeking damages from the initial impact, but on the second accident; the fire explosion. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Ford. Ultimately, the case would be heard by the Supreme Court, and the Court was presented with the issue of comparative fault in crashworthiness cases; and ruled that comparative fault in issues involving first collisions do not apply in crashworthiness cases.
In June, a new law enacted by the Florida legislature now allows jurors to hear evidence of possible plaintiffs’ comparative faults. If you have been involved in a car crash, you should contact a Fort Lauderdale accident attorney to discuss your legal options.
See Our Related Blog Posts:
School Bus Crashes into a Wall at Houston Tavern
Riviera Beach Resident Killed in Florida Turnpike Accident Near St. Cloud
No comments:
Post a Comment