Supreme Court To Decide Limits of Automobile Product Liability Lawsuits

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering a case which could determine whether automakers can be held liable for not installing safety features above and beyond those required by federal law. 

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard arguments on whether a wrongful death lawsuit against Mazda should proceed or be dismissed. The case was brought by the family of Thanh Williamson, who died in a 2002 auto accident while riding in a 1993 Mazda MPV minivan. The minivan had only a lap belt installed in the middle rear seat, and Williamson’s body was wrenched around the lap belt during the impact, resulting in fatal injuries.

The family’s automobile product liability lawsuit contends that Mazda should have included a shoulder restraint in the middle rear seat, since the advantages over a lap belt were well known at the time. However, Mazda has argued that federal regulations did not require anything more than a lap belt, and that since the company met those requirements, it should be shielded from liability for that decision.

One of the deciding factors in the case is likely to be a 2000 Supreme Court decision that prevented lawsuits against Honda for not including air bags in a 1987 Honda Accord. However, one of the justices who voted for that decision, Justice Stephen Breyer, made indications that he thought this case was different and that while federal regulators did not require shoulder restraints, they clearly encouraged automotive manufacturers to use them.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has argued that the lawsuit to be allowed to proceed, indicating that the federal government gave car manufacturers a choice as to whether to install shoulder restraints, but that should not protect them from lawsuits for choosing the cheapest option available.

A decision in the case, Williamson v. Mazda Motor of America, is expected in June 2011.