This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
Product Liability
Design Defects

Chula Vista Elementary School District, Millcreek Manufacturing Company v. C.R. Jaeschke Inc., Carlton-Bates Company, Cherry Electrical Products, Excel Industries Inc., Gearmore Inc., Grammar Inc., Hustler Turf Equipment Inc., Manufacturer's Diversified Services, Masons Saw and Lawnmower Service Inc., Newark Corporation

Published: Oct. 6, 2012 | Result Date: Jun. 7, 2012 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 37-2008-00079721-CU-PO-CTL Verdict –  Defense

Court

San Diego Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

David T. Mara
(Mara Law Firm PC)

William D. Turley
(Turley Law Firm PC)


Defendant

Robert W. Harrison
(Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker)

Patrick J. Kearns
(Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker)


Experts

Plaintiff

Laura Fuchs Dolan
(technical)

Amy Magnusson
(technical)

Richard D. Jones
(Jones Mayer) (technical)

Jeffrey Ketchman
(technical)

Michael A. Lobatz
(medical)

Defendant

Roman R. Beyer
(technical)

Mack A. Quan
(technical)

Facts

The case involved an accident stemming from plaintiff Arthur Fernandez's use of a commercial tractor/mower. Defendant manufactured the seat which was installed on the subject tractor and which contained an operator presence "seat switch," a primary issue in the case. Plaintiff was seriously injured when he was ejected from the tractor seat and run over by his vehicle while aerating a sports field, one of his duties as an employee of a San Diego School District. The "safety interlock system" on the tractor was designed to shut off power to the engine if the operator left the seat and the machine was in drive mode or there was power to an attachment. On the day of the accident, the tractor continued to operate and move forward despite plaintiff's ejection from the seat and ran over him causing substantial injuries.

Plaintiff brought this action for manufacturing defect with respect to the seat switch and strict product liability as well as design defect with respect to the lack of a seat belt.

In addition to bringing suit against the seat manufacturer, plaintiff also sued the manufacturer of the tractor, the dealership where the tractor was purchased, the manufacturer of the aerator and various manufacturers of the electrical components.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged the safety system, including the seat switch in the seat, was defective and caused the accident. He also alleged that the failure of the tractor to have a seat belt, an optional feature on the seats, was a design defect.

Damages

The plaintiff asked the jury for approximately $3.6 million in economic damages and a total of $40 million in non-economic damages.

Result

Defense verdict on both counts.

Deliberation

five hours

Poll

10-2

Length

3.5 weeks


#91781

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390