HONDA OF AMERICA MFG., INC. V. NORMAN
104 S.W.3d 600 (Tex. App. 2003)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a products liability suit. Norma (P) sued Honda (D) alleging
that a design defect in the car's seatbelt was the producing cause of the drowning of P's
daughter. D appealed an award of $38 million in actual damages and the denial of D's motion
for remittitur.
FACTS: Karen attempted to back her car up to turn around, and she accidentally backed
down a boat ramp into the water in Galveston Bay. Her passenger, Josel Woods, was not
wearing a seatbelt and was able to get out of the car by crawling out the passenger side
window. After escaping, Woods reached back into the sinking car to get her purse. Woods
testified that Karen was calm and did not appear scared. As Woods was swimming to the ramp,
she heard Karen say, 'Help me. I can't get my seatbelt undone.' Woods testified that, after
she reached the ramp, she heard Karen yell to her again that she could not get out of her
seatbelt. A dive team located Karen's car and all of the windows were rolled up, including
the one Woods testified she had escaped through, and all the doors were closed. Karen's body
was found in the back seat. An autopsy revealed Karen's blood-alcohol level was .17. The car
was equipped with an automatic seat belt. The shoulder belt could be manually disengaged by
pressing an emergency release button located at the juncture of the belt and the mouse. It
was easy to spool out more belt to allow the occupant to lean forward and/or sideways. If
the car experienced rapid deceleration (such as that encountered here when the car hit the
water) or substantial tilting of the vehicle, however, the belt's emergency locking
retractor would engage, preventing spooling of the belt and holding the occupant in her
seat. P sued D, alleging that the seatbelt system in Karen's car was defectively designed
and prevented her from getting out of the sinking car. The jury found that Karen was 25%
contributorily negligent, awarded P $60 million in actual damages, and awarded $5 million to
Karen's estate. The trial court reduced the award to $20 million for Karen's mother and $18
million for Karen's father, and it denied Honda's motion for remittitur as to the estate. D
appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment