AbleGuy
Officious Intermeddler
Arizona Supreme Court Ruling allows Jeep to be sued for young girl's death because the vehicle involved in a fatal crash did not have automatic safety features that were available but not included in the model involved…
The wrongful death lawsuit from parents of a young girl killed when her mom’s car was rear-ended by a Jeep on a freeway in Phoenix has been allowed by the AZ Supreme Court to proceed against the vehicles manufacturer, seemingly under the rationale that the Jeep’s manufacturer failed to install automatic emergency braking devices on that SUV. That safety feature was available as optional equipment but not included on that specific vehicle.
In a ruling handed down today, the court rejected arguments from lawyers for Jeep parent company Fiat Chrysler, that the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration's decision not to require these devices on every car sold pre-empted the state lawsuit.
My take is…..If the case is ultimately successful at the trial for damages, this could very well mean that auto makers will next have to include as standard equipment on all vehicles sold, all of the reasonably available safety features that previously have been options requiring cost add ons to cars’ purchase prices. Obviously, making all these formerly optional safety features standard will jump up the price for base models of all new vehicles sold in the US.
What duty of care under negligence law would this now create? One is left wondering just how far reaching the impact of this ruling will be. For example, if you don’t get run flat tires on your new rig and have a blow out that causes you to lose control and crash, injuring someone, will the vehicle manufacturer be liable? Or next, maybe the driver for not choosing that option?
*In this case, it was pointed out that the Jeep involved in the fatal crash could have been equipped with the automatic emergency braking system, except that safety feature (allegedly costing the manufacturer only @ $100) was available only as an option in a upgraded package adding an additional $10,000 to its base price.
The wrongful death lawsuit from parents of a young girl killed when her mom’s car was rear-ended by a Jeep on a freeway in Phoenix has been allowed by the AZ Supreme Court to proceed against the vehicles manufacturer, seemingly under the rationale that the Jeep’s manufacturer failed to install automatic emergency braking devices on that SUV. That safety feature was available as optional equipment but not included on that specific vehicle.
In a ruling handed down today, the court rejected arguments from lawyers for Jeep parent company Fiat Chrysler, that the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration's decision not to require these devices on every car sold pre-empted the state lawsuit.
My take is…..If the case is ultimately successful at the trial for damages, this could very well mean that auto makers will next have to include as standard equipment on all vehicles sold, all of the reasonably available safety features that previously have been options requiring cost add ons to cars’ purchase prices. Obviously, making all these formerly optional safety features standard will jump up the price for base models of all new vehicles sold in the US.
What duty of care under negligence law would this now create? One is left wondering just how far reaching the impact of this ruling will be. For example, if you don’t get run flat tires on your new rig and have a blow out that causes you to lose control and crash, injuring someone, will the vehicle manufacturer be liable? Or next, maybe the driver for not choosing that option?
*In this case, it was pointed out that the Jeep involved in the fatal crash could have been equipped with the automatic emergency braking system, except that safety feature (allegedly costing the manufacturer only @ $100) was available only as an option in a upgraded package adding an additional $10,000 to its base price.
Last edited:
