So she was in the rear middle seat? Must have been, that’s the only seating position that has lacked a shoulder harness for decades.
Were shoulder harnesses for this seating position legally required for a Toyota 4Runner in that model year? No.
Did the lap belt provided perform in preventing her from being ejected through the windshield in a high speed frontal impact? Apparently it did.
At what speed was the drunken teen driver traveling? Not specified but it must have been well above the legal limit.
And, how did plaintiff come to find herself in such a seating position traveling at a high rate of speed with a drunken teen driving the vehicle? She was impaired herself, is the obvious conclusion.
Lastly, what was the male/female mix of the jury? Heavy on female, I’m certain.
The guilty party is the driver. High speed drunken impacts cause injury and death, that’s why they’re illegal. There is no vehicle configuration that is going to prevent that.
Nailed it. Even before I went to the link I knew it had to be lib-centric California.
Up next: Suing small car manufacturers for injuries sustained in crashes with large trucks (or, conversely, suing truck manufacturers for the hazard they pose)...if they survive.
Got 'Smart' car? Have Donor Card. Survivors' Lottery. /s