Facts

Jerry Montz was operating a 24-foot-long boat manufactured by MasterCraft Boat Co. on the day of the accident. The boat was being used to tow wakeboarders. He slowed the boat to recover a wakeboarder when the craft began taking on water in the bow. Niki Bell and Bethany Wallenburg were sitting on the bow when they were swept off the boat when the bow swamped. They were swept off the boat and into the water where they were struck by the propeller.

Bell and Wallenburg sued MasterCraft for strict products liability on theories of design defect and failure to warn, and for negligence in design and warning. They also sued Montz for negligent operation of the boat.

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that the design of the X-45 was defective in several ways. First, the broad "pickle fork" bow hull design featured a "reverse sheer" that brought the front of the bow close to the waterline, decrease "freeboard" and increased the propensity of the boat to take on water over the bow.

Second, an anchor locker located just above the waterline at the front of the boat had a large hole at its base that allowed water to flow into the hull of the boat, unknown to the operator and passengers. These defects, plus an over-sized bow seating area that invited a large number of passengers to sit in the front of the boat, combined to cause the bow to submerge without warning during normal, foreseeable operations.

Plaintiffs' liability engineering experts, Ken Fisher and Ed Frisch, opined that there was no rational basis from an architectural/engineering perspective for these design features, and that the risks of the design had no cognizable benefits.

Mastercraft never tested the vessel to determine its operating characteristics or assess the risks of operating the boat at its rated capacity of 2,928 pounds or 18 people.

Plaintiffs' warning expert Bill Kitzes testified that Mastercraft failed to provide warnings of any kind to the operator or passengers about proper weight distribution or the risks of overloading the bow.

Plaintiffs' experts Ken Fisher and biomechanical engineer Toby Hayes also testified that the expanded bow lacked sufficient handrails to provide a chance of preventing being washed overboard, no handrail was within reach of Bell, who was seated at the very front of the vessel.

DEFENDANT MONTZ' CONTENTIONS:
Montz claimed that the boat was defective in ways that could not have been foreseen by passengers or the boat's operator, including holes in the bow anchor locker that allowed water to flow into the locker and down into the boat's hull, with a potential for adding several thousands of pounds of water without the operator's knowledge. This combined with a "negative sheer" design that brought the bow closer to the water than the middle of the boat, increased the craft's propensity to take on water and swamp.

Montz also alleged that MasterCraft failed to perform adequate testing or risk analysis of the craft prior to the incident. Defendant Montz admitted at trial that he was responsible for operation of the boat in a proper manner and that he "gunned" the engine once water started coming over the bow. Although Montz had been drinking before the incident, he registered a blood alcohol level of 0.05 percent, 45 minutes after the event, below the legal limit. He was arrested at the scene and later pleaded no contest to negligent operation of the watercraft.

DEFENDANT MASTERCRAFT'S

Settlement Discussions

Bell served a statutory demand for $6 million dollars roughly 2 years before trial. Bell offered to settle for $14 million during trial. Wallenberg made a statutory demand for $200,000 in Nov. 2009. Mastercraft made no offers in response to the statutory demands. Mastercraft then made a statutory offer of $1 million to Bell shortly before trial then increased their offer to $1.5 million just before opening statements. The time to accept that offer expired before trial. At the time of trial, Mastercraft indicated that was the extent of its offer. During settlement conversations during trial, Mastercraft never came off of its $1.5 million offer. Montz tendered his $1 million policy prior to trial. While the jury was out, Montz settled with the plaintiffs for the policy limits plus an additional $100,000.

Damages

Bell claimed economic damages for medical expenses and past and future income loss for $14.5 million. The jury awarded her entire claim in that regard. She also claimed non-economic damages as a result of the significant brain injury and the ultimate impact of her quality of life. Wallenburg requested economic damages for medical expenses in the amount of $55,688 as well as non-economic damages for emotional distress and disfigurement due to the scarring left by the propeller striking her buttocks and back.

Injuries

Bell was struck by the propeller in the head, fracturing her skull and slicing through her left frontal lobe and ripping her left eye. She was left with significant, permanent brain damage and the loss of her left eye. She underwent several surgical procedures to rebuild her skull. As a result of the accident, she required major assistance for activities of her daily living for the duration of her life. Wallenburg sustained deep, permanent lacerations that severed muscle and nerves in her left elbow and lower back. She has deep permanent and disfiguring scars on her lower back. She also suffered emotional harm.

Result

The jury found the manufacturer primarily at fault for the accident and attributed 80 percent fault to it and found the driver, Montz, 20% at fault. Bell was awarded $30.9 million and $530,688 was awarded to Wallenburg for her injuries.

Other Information

Prior to trial, a settlement was achieved with Cope & McPheters, the distributor of the boat where Montz purchased it. The matter settled shortly before trial for $500,000 for both Bell and Wallenburg. With the determination by the jury of a defect, the insurer for the distributor has indicated it intends to get the $500,000 settlement from the Mastercraft insurer, AIG/Chartis Marine.

Deliberation

2.5 days

Poll

10-2 (that MasterCraft should have reasonably foreseen how the X-45 was going to be used), 11-1 (that the X-45's design was a substantial factor in the accident)

Length

49 days