The Auto Channel
The Largest Independent Automotive Research Resource
The Largest Independent Automotive Research Resource
Official Website of the New Car Buyer

DaimlerChrysler Wins Landmark Air Bag Case

11 May 2000

Verdict Affirms DaimlerChrysler Air Bag Safety
    AUBURN HILLS, Mich., May 11 DaimlerChrysler Corporation scored a major 
legal victory today when a Wayne County, MI jury ruled that the company was 
not responsible for an air bag related fatality.  In a tragic October 1995 
accident, seven-year-old Alison Sanders was killed when her father, Robert 
Sanders, ran a red light.  Because she had slipped off her shoulder seat belt 
and was sitting forward on the edge of her seat, Alison was less than four-inches 
away from the air bag when it deployed.

    Sanders v. DaimlerChrysler has been regarded by the auto industry and
safety advocates as a landmark case since the air bag involved in this lawsuit
was similar to the air bag in the vast majority of vehicles on the road.  The
National Highway Traffic Administration (NHTSA) had reviewed the performance
data of the minivan air bags twice and found no defect.

    "Alison Sanders' death was a tragic accident, made even more tragic
because it could easily have been prevented if she had been properly belted or
if the clear warnings on the sun visor had not been ignored," said
DaimlerChrysler Associate General Counsel Ken Gluckman.

    "We are gratified that the jury agreed that the minivan's air bag was safe
affirming the life-saving protection air bags provide when used properly with
seat belts.  The sad fact is that Alison Sanders would have walked away from
this accident like her brothers did if, like them, she had been wearing her
seat belt properly."

    During the trial, DaimlerChrysler attorneys argued:

    *  This was a serious accident, not a fender bender.  According to his own
expert, Mr. Sanders was traveling at 40 m.p.h. in a 30 m.p.h. zone when he ran
a red light and smashed into a Chevrolet Lumina minivan.  In addition, the
police officer in charge of the accident investigation testified that this was
a "severe" accident; one where he would expect the air bags to deploy.
Furthermore, the accident was serious enough to total the other vehicle, cause
$10,000 in damage to Mr. Sanders' minivan, and partially eject an 84-year-old
woman out the side window of the Lumina minivan, causing her permanent
injuries.  More than 1,200 people are killed and another 22,000 seriously
injured in accidents of similar severity every year.

    *  Air bags save lives, but they must be used properly with seat belts
According to the federal government, more than 5,300 Americans owe their lives
to air bags.  But air bags are a supplemental system, not a replacement for
seat belts.  No properly belted passenger has ever been killed by an air bag
in a DaimlerChrysler vehicle.

    *  The warning that would have saved Alison Sanders' life was ignored.
The 1995 Dodge Caravan involved in this accident came equipped with highly-
visible, federally-mandated warning labels on the sun visor, just inches from
the driver's eyes.  Also, the vehicles owners' manual contained numerous
references to the need to wear seat belts, the risks associated with air bags,
and the risks to children.

    *  This verdict affirms the safety of air bags.  The air bag in the 1995
DaimlerChrysler minivan exceeded 1998 federal safety standards.  In two
similar cases, federal courts previously found no defect with air bags.

    "The air bag in this vehicle was one of the most extensively researched
and tested safety devices in automotive history," said Gluckman.  "This case
serves as a heart-breaking reminder that seat belts often represent the
difference between life and death in auto accidents."

    In the only previous similar trial involving a DaimlerChrysler minivan air
bag, U.S. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff reversed a New York jury's $750,000
judgment and entered a verdict in favor of DaimlerChrysler.  In his November
19, 1999 opinion, Judge Rakoff concluded that "air bags are the proverbial
mixed blessing" that carry "risks that can be reduced but not eliminated."

    During that trial, Judge Rakoff dismissed the plaintiffs' allegation that
the warning labels in the DaimlerChrysler minivan were inadequate, arguing
that no "reasonable juror" could have concluded that the company "should have
placed some different warning ... somewhere else in the vehicle ..."  In
reaching that conclusion, Judge Rakoff noted that the exact language and
location of the warnings were clearly specified by NHTSA, and said he was
starting from the "common sense" proposition: "How can a manufacturer be
liable for following the required rules of law?"