Superior Court Jury Finds for Defense: Hyundai Elantra Wheel Not Defective
A superior court jury earlier this month rendered a defense verdict in favor of Hyundia Motor America in a case in which a driver alleged a wheel had fractured and was defective. That driver said he suffered serious injuries when his Hyundia Elantra crossed lanes of a Connecticut highway.
July 18, 2019 at 11:46 AM
3 minute read
A New London Superior Court jury has rendered a defense verdict in finding that the front driver's side wheel of a new Hyundai Elantra was not defective when the vehicle crossed lanes of a highway, injuring the driver.
In his September 2015 lawsuit, Ryan Brown Jr., a 28-year-old U.S. Navy lieutenant, says he was driving the new vehicle, which he had purchased 13 days earlier, when suddenly the wheel malfunctioned, causing the car to cross lanes of Interstate 95 in Old Lyme before eventually being brought to a stop in the median.
The lawsuit says no other vehicles struck Brown's car, but Brown did say he was “violently thrown about the interior of the vehicle,” suffering orthopedic injuries requiring multiple surgeries and resulting in permanent disabilities. The lawsuit said Brown has suffered lower back pain, chronic pain to his right shoulder and right hip and intermittent lateral ankle pain.
In interrogatories, a six-person jury answered a key question July 3, which sealed the verdict for the defense: “Was the subject wheel defective because it did not comply with design specifications or performance standard?” The answer to that question, the jury determined, was no.
The trial lasted six days and jury deliberations lasted “a matter of minutes,” according to David Case, a partner with Hartford-based McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, who served as one of two defense attorneys for David Cartwright, owner of Central Hyundai in Plainfield. In addition to Cartwright and the dealership, Hyundai Motor America Inc., was named as a defendant.
While the plaintiff maintained the cast aluminum wheel was defective, the defense argued and brought several experts to testify they believed the car struck a large object before the incident.
“We did offer at trial that the plaintiff struck something near or in the highway to cause the fracture,” Case said.
Specifically, Case told the Connecticut Law Tribune on Thursday, state Department of Transportation records showed there was construction work on Interstate 95 in that area at the time of incident.
“DOT records, including photos at the time, showed there was heavy construction done to the overpass,” Case said. “There were construction supplies, debris and equipment near the roadway. The testimony was the incident with the wheel could have been generated by a piece of iron, concrete debris or a large enough piece of lumber. All the laboratory testing showed the wheel met all specifications and was not defective.”
Thor Holth, a partner with New London-based Holth & Kollman, represented Brown. Holth told the Connecticut Law Tribune on Thursday he has filed a motion for a new trial. Holth had no further comment.
Case said plaintiffs had requested about $700,000 at trial. Immediately prior to trial, Case said, their demand was as much as $1.5 million and was later reduced to $775,000.
Prior to the jury verdict being rendered, Case said, “We felt confident because of how the evidence was presented. Our client, Hyundai, takes seriously the allegations that their product was defective. The product, though, is totally safe and not defective.”
Robert Maxwell of Covington, Louisiana-based Bernard, Cassisa, Elliott & Davis assisted Case in the matter.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDC Judge Rules Russia Not Immune in Ukrainian Arbitration Award Dispute
2 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readApple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250