The state Superior Court has reaffirmed its decision to allow a car company to argue a controversial theory of injury during rollover accidents that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration arguably disavowed in 2009.
On Monday, an en banc panel of the state Superior Court in Parr v. Ford Motor ruled that a trial court properly dismissed post-trial motions from the plaintiffs contending, among other things, that they should have been allowed to introduce NHTSA documents from 2009 discrediting Ford’s theory of injury. The plaintiffs had argued that the trial court should have deferred to the NHTSA’s findings to preclude Ford’s theory that “diving” and “torso augmentation” caused head and neck injuries to belted passengers.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
