Design Defects in Automotive Products Liability Cases

The basic elements of proof that a plaintiff in a products liability action against the manufacturer or seller of a car or truck has to establish are that the vehicle as sold contained a defect that created an unreasonable risk of death, personal injury, or property damage when the vehicle was used for its intended purpose and that the defect caused an accident or similar incident, such as a vehicle fire, that resulted in the loss for which the plaintiff is seeking to recover damages. Allegations of product defect in automotive products liability cases include inadequacies in vehicle design, errors in the manufacture of vehicle parts and their assembly into a completed car or truck, and failure to warn users of a vehicle about dangers inherent in its use.

Effect of Recall Campaigns on Automotive Products Liability Cases

The basic elements of proof that a plaintiff has to establish in a products liability action against a manufacturer or seller of a motor vehicle are that the vehicle as sold contained a defect that created an unreasonable risk of death, personal injury, or property damage when the vehicle was used for its intended purpose and that the defect caused an accident or similar incident, such as a vehicle fire, that resulted in the damage or loss for which the plaintiff seeks to recover damages. Vehicle defects for purposes of establishing liability in such a case include shortcomings in the design of a vehicle, errors in the manufacture of its component parts or in their assembly into a complete car or truck, and failure to warn the purchaser or operator of risks inherent in the use and operation of the vehicle. Safety-related recall campaigns covering a vehicle involved in such an action can have an effect on the outcome of the dispute between the parties.

Stacking Provisions for Auto-Insurance

Often more than one automobile insurance policy is in effect for vehicles involved in a collision. Sometimes a single insurance policy can contain several types of coverage that could be applied to the accident. When these situations exist, an insured or the passengers in the insured's vehicle may seek to combine the benefits of the multiple coverage provisions in the policy or policies. This is called "stacking." It can also be called "pyramiding."

Underinsured/Uninsured Motorists Mandatory Coverage

Requirements for providing or offering underinsured motorist coverage and uninsured motorist coverage are not uniform. In some states, it is mandatory for insurers to provide a specified amount of underinsured motorist and uninsured motorist coverage; the amounts that are specified may coincide with the minimum required liability insurance coverage in the state. In other states, insurers are merely required to make such coverage available to the purchasers of auto insurance policies. In yet other states, the subject of underinsured motorist and uninsured motorist coverage is considered to be a voluntary matter between the insurer and the insured.

Ambiguity in Auto Insurance Policy Language

Policies of motor vehicle insurance are detailed documents that cover numerous aspects of the business relationship between an insurer and its insured. When this fact is matched up with the great variety of ways in which incidents can occur that may give rise to claims under a policy, it will not be considered surprising that the insurer and the insured will sometimes hold differing views of the meaning of a particular policy provision. When a party to a contract of motor vehicle insurance asserts that potential ambiguities exist in the language of an auto insurance policy, courts are often called upon to decide the meanings of the disputed policy terms and rule on related issues of coverage under the policy.