Randy Barnhart

NHTSA Proposes Auto Brake-Throttle Override Rule

The U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) today proposed new rules on safety standards "to ensure drivers can better stop a vehicle in the event both the brake and accelerator pedals are depressed at the same time." Supposedly, NHTSA did some research which indicates a "Brake-Throttle Override" rule will reduce risks of sudden unintended acceleration by making application of the brakes "override" the threottle control system.

Said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood:

America's drivers should feel confident that anytime they get behind the wheel they can easily maintain control of their vehicles — especially in the event of an emergency. By updating our safety standards, we're helping give drivers peace of mind that their brakes will work even if the gas pedal is stuck down while the driver is trying to brake.

Still blaming the driver, as you can see, not the electronic control system design or manufacturing defects.

NHTSA did state that that the proposed rule "aims to minimize the risk that drivers will lose control of their vehicles as a result of either accelerator control system disconnections or accelerator pedal sticking or floormat entrapment."  The problem is not a dosconnection, but a run-away connection.

The proposed rule would amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 124, Accelerator Control Systems, by updating the throttle control disconnection test procedures for all passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses, regardless of weight. For vehicles that have Electronic Throttle Control (ETC) and a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) 10,000 lbs. (4,536 kilograms) or less, the proposal would also require manufacturers include a Brake-Throttle Override (BTO) system to ensure the vehicle would stop if both the brake and the accelerator pedals are simultaneously applied. Many manufacturers are already including BTO systems in their vehicle fleets.

Stating the obvious, NHTSA Administrator David Strickland proclaims:

We learned as part of the comprehensive NASA and NHTSA studies of high-speed unintended acceleration that brake override systems could help drivers avoid crashes. While NHTSA's defect investigation program will continue to monitor and consider consumer complaints of any potential vehicle safety issues, this proposal is one way the agency is helping keep drivers safe and continuing to work to reduce the risk of injury from sticky pedals or pedal entrapment issues.

You can comment on the "Brake-Throttle Override" proposal, which is here.

Brain Injuries Are Not No-Brainers

March is brain injury awareness month!

Brain injuries can have consequences which cannot be predicted or even properly self-assessed because such an injury, due to an accident caused by a defective product for example, can affect who that person thinks he or she is, or the way that person thinks and feels. Get more information here.

If you have, or a loved one has, suffered an accident or trauma due to a design or manufacturing defect in a product and which accident you believe has or may have caused a brain injury, you can be certain that the firm knows that a brain-injured person is person first and foremost, that we know that no two brain injuries are identical, and that the effects of brain injury can be complex and vary from person to person.

Call the firm today if you have any questions.

Dumping Defective Hip Implants Overseas

The Trial Lawyer, A Magazine for Trial Lawyers & a Voice for Justice, re-reported an important article in the N.Y. Times about how non-FDA-approved hip implants were shipped off-shore instead. Here's an excerpt demonstrating the typical shift-the-blame stance taken by manufacturing conglomerates regarding the risks of their defective products:

Before the recall, DePuy long defended the articular surface replacement device, saying that any failures associated with it reflected failures by surgeons to properly implant the hip cup. The surgeons who performed the study of the resurfacing version of the device that was rejected by the F.D.A. were handpicked by DePuy and included the model’s designers.

Dr. Antoni Nargol, an orthopedic surgeon in England who worked on the study that DePuy submitted to the F.D.A. and later became a critic of the device, said in a telephone interview that the company had never informed him that its application for approval in the United States had been rejected.

Thousands of people now face pain and injury due to defective hip implants. Contact the firm if you have questions about the safety of your hip implant and your legal rights.

Auto Electronic Control Systems and Your Safety

As a long-time products liability lawyer fighting the auto manufacturers for negligently if not also knowingly allowing their defective products to cause their loyal customers serious personal injury, I was interested in the recent statement by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding a report on electronic control systems released by the National Academy of Sciences:

NHTSA commissioned the panel of National Academy of Sciences appointees to comprehensively review electronic control systems. While the auto manufacturers quack "safe, safe, safe," NHTSA stated that it needs to better understand the causes of unintended acceleration in passenger vehicles. So there is more than one cause? There is more than the supposed cause advertised by the manufacturers - lead foot on the gas pedal?

On its website, NHTSA states: The agency "has already taken steps to strengthen its expertise in electronic control systems while expanding research in this area — and the agency has considerable experience dealing with vehicle electronics issues in its research, rulemaking, and enforcement programs. But, NHTSA will continue to evaluate and improve every aspect of its work to keep the driving public safe, including research to assess potential safety concerns and help ensure the reliability of electronic control systems in vehicles. The agency will also further refine its strategic plan to address any potential technical and policy issues."

Potential safety concerns? There is nothing potential about the facts of electronic systems going haywire. Potential technical and policy issues?

Update - February 3, 2012: see this article, Electronics in Autos Pose New Safety Issues, Scientists Say, in the Insurance Journal.

Metal-on-Metal Hip Device?

Artificial hip replacement devices, but especially Metal-on-Metal (MoM) hip implants, come with unique risks associated with the daily wear on the ball and socket. The metal ball and the metal socket or cup are in constant contact and wear while walking and running. As a result, microscopic metal bits or particles shed away from the device and enter into the tissue around the implant. Further, these metal particles can transmute to metallic ions which can then enter the bloodstream. Even if the surgeon takes every precaution, shedding metal particles cannot be completely avoided. See this article on wikipedia.

To be sure, not all people who receive MoM hip implants have the same reaction to the metal particles or ions. It is impossible to predict who will experience a negative reaction to the metal debris, and if so, what precisely that negative reaction will be. Also unknowable is when the negative reaction might happen or its severity. Still, it is true that over time, the metal debris shed by MoM implants can cause serious damage to bone and tissue in the hip area, called "adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR)" or "adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD)." Further, the metallic ions can effect on heart, nervous system, and thyroid gland. In many cases, the resulting pain compels a "revision surgery" which replaces the implanted device with a new one.

The firm is actively investigating cases of failed hip implants. Several involve the Wright Profemur Z Hip. Protect your rights: a Metal-on-Metal (MoM) hip implant may cause serious injury and pain, requiring replacement. More here.

Recall: Power X Bike Chain Defect - Product Liability

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Hazard: The bicycle chain can break, causing a rider to lose control and fall.

Incidents/Injuries: The firm is aware of 11 reports of incidents, including 9 reports of injuries, including lacerations and contusions.

Description: This recall involves “NEXT”-branded men’s 26-inch hybrid bicycles. The bicycles are red or orange. “Power X” and “Suspension” are printed on the frame. Model numbers LBH2611M and LBH2611M2 are included in this recall. The model number is located on the frame between the pedals.

Sold at Walmart from February 2011 through July 2011 for about $100.

Stop using the recalled bicycle and contact the company for a free repair.

Consumer Contact: Bridgeway International at (877) 934-3228 - or visit the firm’s website at www.powerxbike.com.

 

 

NEXT BRANDED BICYCLES SOLD AT WAL-MART

 

The 26-inch bicycles are red or orange and “Power X” and “Suspension” are printed on the frame. 

 

Model Numbers:  LBH2611M and LBH2611M2

 

Bicycles were sold from February 2011 through approximately July 2011 with manufacturing Date Codes between 20110101 to 20110420 (January 1, 2011 and April 20, 2011)

 

 

 

 

Stop using the NEXT Power X bicycle immediately.  Inspect the manufacturing label on the bottom of the bicycle frame. If you have a bicycle that was manufactured between January 1, 2011 and April 20, 2011, please contact Bridgeway International for a free repair.

Colorado Products Liability - The Innocent Seller Defense, Part 1

Defendants who are "sellers" of defective products, that is, who sell products with design defects, manufacturing defects, or which fail to provide adequate warnings or instructions on use to minimize the risk of injury or property damage, will typically invoke the Colorado statute, 13-21-401 et seq.

The statute provides that an action cannot be maintained against a "seller" of an allegedly defective product unless:

(1) the seller also manufactured the product,
(2) the manufacturer of the product is not subject to the Court’s jurisdiction, or
(3) the seller had actual knowledge of the defect at the time of sale.

Apart from those three exceptions, however, an action against a defendant may not be on account of the defendant's status as a  "seller." Yet, defendants who are also "sellers" will argue that they can only be sued as a "seller" if in fact they sold the defective product which allegedly caused personal injury or damage. With that strategy, defendants will then loudly proclaim themselves as "innocent sellers" in order to invoke the immunity to liability provided by the statute.

Not so fast. Nothing in the statute precludes a suit against a defendant, otherwise also the "seller" of the defective product in question, who is allegedly negligent in some other capacity, for example, on account of their status as a service provider with regard  to the defective product in question. 

Let's say the innocent seller is also an allegedly culpable "recaller," that is, the seller is a link in the chain of a product recall initiated by the manufacturer or ordered by a regulatory entity (for example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration), because of a defect in the product. What then?

Come back soon for the answer.

STIHL Recalls Yard Power Products Due to Burn and Fire Hazards

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Name of Product: Gas powered STIHL trimmers, brushcutters, KombiMotors, hedge trimmers, edgers, clearing saws, pole pruners, and backpack blowers that utilize a toolless fuel cap

Units: About 2.3 million

Manufacturer: STIHL Inc., of Virginia Beach, Va.

Hazard: The level of ethanol and other fuel additives can distort the toolless fuel cap, allowing fuel to spill, posing a fire and burn hazard.

Incidents/Injuries: STIHL has received 81 reports of difficulty installing and/or removing the fuel caps and fuel spillage. No injuries have been reported.

via www.cpsc.gov