11th Circuit Refuses to Reconsider Ruling Against Seat Belt Manufacturer
The appellate panel that revived claims against a seatbelt maker in a fatal wreck case declined to re-hear arguments asking the Georgia Supreme Court to rule on the states defective product law.
July 17, 2018 at 03:02 PM
3 minute read
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reconsider its March opinion allowing a wrongful death suit to proceed against a company that manufactured a seat belt blamed in the death of man killed when his Mazda 3 ran off the road. The lawyers for Autoliv Japan Ltd., the company that manufactured the seat belt, had asked the appeals court to certify a question to the Georgia Supreme Court as to whether Georgia's product liability law allowed the makers to be held liable even if they were not “actively involved” in the devices' design or specifications. Judge William Duffey Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ruled that it did not and threw the case out last year on summary judgment, but the appellate panel disagreed and revived two of three claims. Ruling that, although Georgia's defective product law does shield “mere product sellers” from liability, that provision “expressly does not apply to actual manufacturers such as Autoliv,” said the appellate panel of Judges Charles Wilson and Joel Dubina and Judge Richard Goldberg of the U.S. Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. Joining Autoliv in asking for reconsideration was the Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association, whose amicus brief said the appeals panel opinion, if left standing, would upend decades of law protecting the suppliers of original equipment for automakers whose products meet the carmaker's specifications. “This court should avoid placing unjust, inefficient, and disproportionate burdens on vehicle parts manufacturers and suppliers, the nation's largest employer of manufacturing jobs, unless it is certain that its decision is based on a sound interpretation of Georgia law,” said the amicus brief provided a Marc Fleischaker, Donald McLean, Alison Anderson and Andrew Murad of Washington, D.C.'s Arent Fox. The case involves a single-car accident in 2013 when Micah Andrews' vehicle went off an interstate and hit a line of trees. Andrews was wearing his seat belt, but the air bag failed to deploy and his head hit the steering column. Andrews' widow, Jamie Andrews, initially sued Mazda, air bag-maker Bosch LLC and Autoliv. Bosch and Mazda settled, leaving only Autoliv. Andrews is represented by Butler Wooten & Peak partners Jim Butler and Tedra Cannella and Ballard & Feagle partners William Ballard and Gregory Feagle. “This was a seat belt that spooled out 17 inches. Mr. Andrews hit the steering wheel so hard you could see an impression of it in his head,” Cannella said. ”The idea that you could turn around and say the seat belt performed as it was designed and there was nothing wrong with it is absurd,” she said. “We're looking forward to trying the case and getting back before the court. We think this is one of those cases a jury will be very interested to hear.” Alston & Bird partner Doug Scribner, who represents Autoliv with senior associate Jenny Mendelsohn, was unavailable for comment.
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 AllFederal Judge Rejects Teams' Challenge to NASCAR's 'Anticompetitive Terms' in Agreement
'Stock Car Monopoly'?: Winston Lawsuit Alleges NASCAR Anticompetitive Scheme
3 minute readTrending Stories
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