Defending a Traffic Accident Case

By: Anthony J. MonacoSwanson, Martin & Bell, LLP(312) 923-8244amonaco@smbtrials.com

SMB, LLP – May 23, 2007 – Defending a Traffic Accident Case by Anthony J. Monaco for Chicago Volunteer Legal Services

OUTLINE

A) Brief StatisticsB) Basic Principles In Auto CollisionsC) Winning With Demonstratives

i) photographsii) video demonstrationsiii) animations

A) Medical SpecialsB) Biomechanical Engineers and

Human Factors ExpertsA) EDRB) Key Product Liability Issues

A NATIONAL TRAGEDY

Traffic deaths are a “national tragedy”

US Transportation Secretary (4/20/06)

He called on all Americans to respond by wearing safety belts, using motorcycle helmets and driving sober

BRIEF STATISTICS

43,200 deaths in 2005 vs.

42,636 deaths in 2004

Highway crashes cost society $230.6 billion per year

In 2004, motor vehicle traffic crashes were the leading cause of death for every age 2 through 34

SEATBELT USE

Seatbelt usage rate in Illinois in 2006 was 87.8%

National Average was 81% in 2006

According to NHTSA, thousands of lives would be saved each year by simply wearing seatbelts

THE THREE IMPACTS & DECELERATION THEORY

A) Vehicle with outside object

B) Body with inside vehicle components

C) Organs with inside of body

Delta V

The most significant factor in a motor vehicle accident is the change in velocity.

Compare head-on collision vs. rear-end collision.

SHOW YOUR EVIDENCE

Photographs Video Demonstrations Buc’s Remains of Actual Vehicle Google Map – Google Earth Animations Combinations

1989 Volvo

1998 Dodge Dakota

Which truck accident resulted in more serious injuries?

Case Law on Admissibility of Vehicle Damage Photos

DiCosola v. Bowman, 342 Ill. App. 3d 530 (1st Dist. 2003)

Ferro v. Griffiths, 361 Ill. App. 3d 738 (3rd Dist. 2005)

GOOGLE MAP AND EARTH

Cheap and easy method to make high quality demonstrative exhibits

Video Demonstrations of Scientific Accident Reconstruction Principles

Plaintiff testifies that ball joint separates, car veers right then left then collision

We believe the ball joint separation occurred impact Plaintiff’s expert has no opinion during first

deposition on why car veers after alleged ball joint separation

Errata Sheet comes with his newly formed opinion he describes as “clarification”

Re-deposition – he explains new opinion in detail – toe in, drag factors, etc…

We demonstrate that he is wrong

Video Demonstration

Please open and view the ball joint video demonstration

Medical Specials

Arthur v. Catour, 216 Ill. 2d 72 (2005)

Plaintiff’s burden of proof

Human Factors & Biomechanics

Can make or break your case Cost considerations Admissibility considerations

Electronic Data Recorders (EDR or black box)

“a device or function that records the vehicle’s dynamic, time-series data during the time period just prior to a crash event (e.g., vehicle speed vs. time) or during a crash event (e.g., delta-V vs. time).” 71 Fed. Reg. 50997 (Aug. 28, 2006)

EDR’s cont…

An EDR that complies with NHTSA’s rule will monitor several systems such as: air bags, brakes, seatbelts and speed changes.

The Rule does not require EDR’s but does mandate what information an EDR collects and the format of the stored information (privacy arguments)

PURPOSES FOR EDR’S

Enhance automatic crash notification systems including an enhanced 911 emergency response system

Enhance understanding of crash events and safety performance thereby contributing to safer vehicle designs, more effective safety regulations and overall improved highway safety

Help parties determine fault – electronic witness Reduce cost of litigation – insurers can more

accurately evaluate liability and resolve claims more quickly with greater certainty of the facts

ADMISSIBILITY OF EDR DATA

Bachman v. General Motors Corp., 776 N.E.2d 262 (4th Dist. 2002) – first reported case.

1996 Chevrolet Cavalier (SDM) sensing diagnostic module

Data refuted the plaintiff’s theory that the air bag deployed inadvertently

Court found “the process of recording and downloading SDM data is sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the relevant scientific community.”

PRODUCT LIABILITY KEY ISSUES

NHTSA Cost to present case Vehicle inspections Spoliation of evidence Experts Other incidents

Willis Accident / Animation

$100 million settlement by all defendants to the plaintiff

$10 million paid by DaimlerChrysler Corporation

$10 million recovered by DaimlerChrysler Corporation

Vehicle Performance References

NHTSA – Crash Test Resultswww.safercar.gov

NHTSA – Vehicle & Equipment Informationwww.nhtsa.dot.gov

IIHSwww.iihs.org

EuroNCAPwww.euroncap.com

Australian New Car Assessment Programwww.aaa.asn.au/ancap.htm

New Car Assessment Japanwww.nasva.go.jp/mamoru/english/index/html