Calif. Ct. App. Affirms $1.8 Million Verdict in Forklift Injury Case
By NICK SULLIVAN, Andrews Publications Staff Writer
A state appeals court in California has affirmed a $1.8 million jury award to a forklift operator who lost a leg in an accident, rejecting defense arguments that the plaintiff should have been required to prove the existence of a feasible safer design.
The appeals court said the burden was on the defendant, Toyota Industrial Equipment Manufacturing Inc., to show that the benefits of the allegedly defective design outweighed the risks.
Court records say Eugenio Feliciano was severely injured in January 2003 when a tire on a Toyota Series 7 forklift split and caused the machine to topple over, crushing his leg.
Feliciano sued Toyota in the San Mateo County Superior Court, claiming that the defective design of the Series 7 put excessive stress on the tires.
In 2005 the jury returned a 9-3 verdict and awarded Feliciano $1.8 million for lost wages, medical expenses, and pain and suffering.
Affirming, the California 1st District Court of Appeal held, "Toyota's assertion that a plaintiff in a strict-liability design-defect case must prove the feasibility of a safer alternative design is an assertion that is founded on cases from other jurisdictions and has no support under California law."
The panel said that contrary to the defendant's argument, there is no split on this issue, with the California Supreme Court having "spoken unequivocally" in Barker v. Lull Engineering Co., 20 Cal. 3d 413, 429 (1978); Campbell v. General Motors Corp. 32 Cal. 3d 112, 118-119 (1982); and Soule v. General Motors Corp., 8 Cal. 4th 548, 560 (1994).
The appeals court also said sufficient evidence supported the verdict.
It was undisputed, the court noted, that Toyota's "system of active stability" suspension mechanism puts greater lateral force on forklift tires than a conventional design.
Feliciano presented evidence that Series 7 forklifts used the same tires as conventional models that did not have the SAS mechanism, the panel added.
To comment, ask questions or contribute articles, contact [email address removed].
Showing items 1 - 8 of 8 results.
Toyota's only fault here was to try and "idiot proof " a machine. Oh yes.... we must take all the onus off of the operator to slow down or quit doing stupid things. I'm not saying let's go out and kill all the stupid people.... I'm just saying let's remove all the warning labels and let the problem sort itself out !
Our customers have most common brands of forklifts including Toyota, the customers using the Toyotas by and large seem to be very satisfied in terms of quality and cost. I think it too simplistic to blast Toyota because of the result of one court case. Courts don't always make the right decisions I can assure you and neither do juries. Should the inventor of seatbelts or safety glass be sent to jail because occassionally they might cause death even though they save many more than they cost? I have no vested interest either way, but I think it is WAY premature to call SAS a bad system, unless of course you work for another manufacturer or dealer that handles another brand?
You might want to take a close look at the Clark - headquarters in Lexington and parts distribution Center in Louisville & good dealer representation in the Blue grass state.
Very interesting, never liked the SAS system as it encourages operators to corner faster, this in turn will cause the overload of the tyres on the of the truck. Indeed, a safety system that was ill conceived, over promoted and expensive to maintain. A better way to improve safety when cornering is to reduce speed automatically.
Ray,
You may want to take a look at Linde electrics.
Now the Earth's #1 Lift Truck is # 1 in jury awarded injuries and LAST in SAFETY!!!
We have had many problems with Toyota SAS and will not release at the end of this year. I asked several sister plants and they have had the same issues we had. I am very pleased I was given this task to find another alternative other then Toyota. I did take advantage of networking with some of my competition and suppliers and found that my cost of ownership was extremely high caused by the maintenance related to SAS and have been switching over to Yale's.It wasn't the dealerships fault or operator's, In fact the dealership went out of the way to help us at no cost. Now I am looking at the new Yale AC Electric's with fast charging.
Sometimes we get complacent and over look what a fork lift cost per hour and networking with others can be a life saver.
Thanks,
Ray Stanwood
Forkliftaction.com accepts no responsibility for forum content and requires forum participants to adhere to the rules. Click here for more information.