---

DaimlerChrysler Applauds Judge's Decision in New York Air Bag Case

23 November 1999

DaimlerChrysler Applauds Judge's Decision in New York Air Bag Case

       - Supplementary Restraints Must Be Used Properly to Save Lives -

    AUBURN HILLS, Mich., Nov. 22 -- DaimlerChrysler
applauded United States District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff's decision Friday
to overturn a $750,000 damage award in an air bag lawsuit.  In a legal
victory, the judge ruled that the company was not responsible for the tragic
death of a five-year-old New York boy who was not wearing a seat belt and was
killed during a head-on collision.  Judge Rakoff found that the plaintiff
failed to produce any scientific evidence to contradict the testimony, and
common sense conclusion, that air bags overall save many more lives than they
cost.
    Judge Rakoff's decision not only vindicates DaimlerChrysler, but clearly
establishes the principle that air bags must be used properly in order to save
lives, said DaimlerChrysler Assistant General Counsel Kenneth Gluckman.  The
tragic truth of this case is that the difference between life and death for
the child was the fact that he was not wearing his seat belt.
    On December 4, 1998, a New York jury found DaimlerChrysler 50% liable and
hit the company with $750,000 in damages stemming from the death of five-year-
old Michael Crespo who was killed when an air bag deployed in a 1995 Dodge
Caravan during a head-on collision.  At the time of the accident, Michael was
riding in the front seat of the minivan without a seat belt.  Medical experts
testified that the child would have escaped serious injury had he been
properly belted.
    In post-trial motions before Judge Rakoff, DaimlerChrysler argued that the
plaintiffs failed to show that any feasible alternative air bag design would
have prevented injuries to Michael Crespo.  In discussing the alternative
designs proposed by the plaintiff judge Rakoff found that, "it is clear that
plaintiff utterly failed to adduce any competent evidence that any of these
proposed alternatives was safer than defendant's design."
    The plaintiff's principal claim was that the airbag deployed at a lower
vehicle speed than it should have.  According to Gluckman, the air bag in the
Caravan was designed to deploy at the same speed as air bags in virtually
every other vehicle on the road at the time.  In addition, the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration -- the government agency charged with
ensuring automotive safety -- agreed that the deployment speed was appropriate
and consistent with the federal government's goal of promoting greater safety
for the greatest number of passengers.
    Gluckman noted that a Cleveland, Ohio jury recently rejected arguments
that an even lower deployment speed was too low in an air bag child-death suit
against automaker Volvo.  In that case, a six-year-old girl was killed because
she was riding in the front seat and not wearing a seat belt.
    "With Judge Rakoff's decision and the Cleveland verdict, we now have two
precedent-setting legal rulings that existing deployment speeds are not
defective and that air bags must be used properly to save lives," said
Gluckman.  "While we are gratified by these victories in the courtroom, we
hope these tragic accidents reinforce to parents the critical need to keep
kids buckled in the back seat."