Posted on 02/04/2007 10:44:55 PM PST by Pontiac
Two decades ago, 2-year-old Adam Matyaszek was thrown from a Ford Bronco II after the sport utility vehicle driven by his father rolled over three times along Interstate 77 in Cleveland.
The boy's skull was fractured and his brain bled after his head hit the pavement. The crash injuries left him prone to seizures and unable to sleep and caused memory problems, his lawyers say.
This week, a federal jury will decide if the Bronco II had a faulty design that contributed to the crash.
"It is unfair to blame Ford for Adam's injuries, which were caused by his father's driving and failure to properly restrain Adam in a child seat," attorney Elizabeth Wright said in a written statement.
The toddler was without a seat belt in the cargo area of the Bronco II driven by his father in April 1987. They were traveling north near the East 55th Street exit when two cars approached quickly from behind.
Walter Matyaszek said he tried to move out of their way but oversteered. The Bronco flipped and then rolled three times.
(Excerpt) Read more at cleveland.com ...
The father in question is clearly negligent in this case allowing his toddler son to be unrestrained in the cargo area with the car in motion. Even 20 years ago it was well known to be unsafe if not illegal to have children unrestrained in a car.
Ford should not have made any settlement with this man to begin with.
Anyone who knows me know there is no love lost between me and Ford- but that being said... In this case, exactly what liability could FORD have? The father had the child unrestrained in a non-passenger area... Not FORD's fault.
Further more - who/what caused the accident? It isn't even questioned if the FORD vehicle was at fault in causing the accident...
And now - two decades later????
"...biased reporting which is the norm for this paper makes Ford out to be an evil capitalist company out to sell cheap unsafe cars..."
Yes, and these are precisely the same tactics that lawyers use to get juries to award hugh sums to plaintiffs, when the case is clearly not negligence.
John Edwards is a pro at this; it's how he made his millions. Well, that and "channeling" children.
Seems to me the father admitted fault he overcorrected trying to avoid other cars and flipped the Bronco II.
The only valid blame here is on the father.
Deep pockets and a needy child; the best recipe for a product liability lawyer.
Deep pockets and a needy child; the best recipe for a product liability lawyer.
Further evidence of the death of personal responsibility.
Thanks to lawyers we will one day see a warning on a Big Mac wrapper that says.....
Warning: Too many Big Macs can lead to severe obesity, high blood pressure, and other health problems. Please consume wisely and in moderation.
That's after the 3 buck "fat tax".
We are not as far from the "fat tax" as people might think.
Anything that is "sin" in the eyes of liberals is at risk.
Fat foods
Firearms and ammo
Fishing and Hunting
Gasoline engines
add your own.....
The list of potential revenue sources is enough to make Billary drool.
I heard John Edwards may be available he now has to pay for that huge spread in Chapel Hill.
I can see that warning label running in to 4 volumes (Cheese may cause severe intestinal gas and cramps in some people, those who keep Kosher should order this product with out cheese, lettuce imported from Mexico in this product may contain high amounts fecal bacteria…. And so on ad nauseum)
Oh that little thing. Its being covered by his asbestos dividends
It was NOT illegal 20 years ago. 20 years ago we could still ride in the back of pick up trucks with no cover.
20 years ago, kids could ride in the front seat unrestrained, on parent's laps and seat belts weren't even mandatory.
Child safety seats have not been mandatory all that long. If there is a safety issue with a specific vehicle that makes it impossible to control or there's a known safety flaw that is ignored - who should be responsible for it?
I know it's fun to just assume that newspapers are pushing an agenda, but this has been an ongoing case - see more info here.
http://www.ewg.org/issues_content/vehiclesafety/20030417/pdf/DOJ_letter_20040417.pdf
factoid - NY was the first state to require child seats - in 1984
by 2002 - 32 states required it....
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSF2002/2002occfacts.pdf
I am quite sure that children were required to be restrained in automobiles in Ohio prior to 1983
http://openweb.tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/1983-6/1983-06-10-ABC-8.html
It might not have been illegal 20 years ago nor mandatory. But my kids rode in car seats 20 years ago. Why because it was the smart thing to do just like wearing seat belts was and still is.
All truck-based vehicles (like SUVs) are just waiting to roll: too many use their roofs to leap over guardrails!
Keep higher-than-normal tire pressures.
Anyone else recall those commercials by Lee Iacocca touting the awesome innovation of "Twin I-Beam Suspension". Who knew, 25 years later that because of that "innovation" trucks would be rolling over regularly? What is good is bad, what is right is wrong, everything goes opposite.
What does the automobile manufacturer have to do with the pavement?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.