— Most automobile lawsuits involve allegations of defective vehicle parts that caused the vehicle to be defective. But a New Jersey lawsuit claims the Honda CR-V is defective simply because it isn’t equipped with certain features.
The big question is: Is a vehicle’s design defective simply because it doesn’t contain driver-assist technology that’s not required by federal or state law?
In this case, the plaintiff argued that the 2016 Honda CR-V was defectively designed because it was not equipped with a lane departure warning system and a lane keeping assist system.
The tragic fatal crash occurred on August 4, 2018, when 73-year-old Elizabeth MacNamara was driving a 2016 Honda CR-V southbound on Route 657 in Cape May County, New Jersey. on County Road (CR).
CR 657 is a two-lane road separated by a yellow dashed line with a 50 mph speed limit, the lawsuit states. The day of the accident was cloudy but not raining and the road was flat and mostly straight.
Shortly before noon, the Honda CR-V crossed the center line and collided head-on with a 2011 Ford Escape driven by 64-year-old Dr. Ann Ramage.
The accident killed both McNamara and Ramage.
Data from the Honda CR-V showed that the steering torque was zero in the five seconds before the accident, the brake pedal was not depressed, the turn signal was not turned on, and the Honda was traveling at a speed of 47 to 50 mph.
Honda CR-V car accident lawsuit
In April 2020, plaintiff Richard T. Berkoski, the husband of Ford Escape driver Ann Ramage, sued Honda, claiming that the car driven by Elizabeth MacNamara The 2016 Honda CR-V has a flawed design and is unsafe because it is not equipped with a Lane Departure Warning (LDW) system and a Lane Keeping Assist (LKA) system.
According to the plaintiff, if the Honda CR-V had been equipped with LDW and LKA systems and these systems had been in use on the day of the fatal accident, the accident could have been avoided.
If it is activated, the Lane Departure Warning system will alert the driver if it detects that the vehicle has inadvertently crossed lane markings without using a turn signal. The system alerts the driver by beeping and lighting up the lane departure message on the vehicle information display.
However, the LDW feature does not provide any braking or steering assistance.
Then, when Lane Keeping Assist is activated, the system applies steering torque to help the driver keep the vehicle centered in the lane of travel.
If the vehicle inadvertently crosses a detected lane line, a message will appear on the vehicle’s information display, an audio alert will sound, and steering torque will be applied to return the vehicle to the center of its intended lane of travel.
The plaintiff sent two experts, a design expert and a causation expert. One expert confirmed that LDW and LKA systems “are available and economically viable technologies that can be added to the 2016 Honda CR-V.”
He also claims that the 2016 Honda CR-V is unsafe because it does not have these features.
Another expert opined, “Had Honda had a working (LKA system), this collision would not have occurred.”
However, both experts agreed that the 2016 Honda CR-V complies with all mandatory motor vehicle safety standards.
An expert for the plaintiffs testified that there is no “federal or state legal requirement to include all possible technologies, even those that might be considered safety systems on every vehicle.”
He also testified that he did not notice any “mechanical failure” in the Honda CR-V.
Honda acknowledged that lane departure warning and lane keeping assist systems were introduced in 2016. The features are available on higher-end models of the 2016 Honda CR-V, and Honda says the systems could have been added to other 2016 models for an additional fee if customers requested it.
However, the plaintiffs maintain that Honda should offer these technologies even if the 2016 Honda CR-V complies with all other motor vehicle safety standards.
Motion to Dismiss Honda CR-V Collision Lawsuit
Honda said the lawsuit should be dismissed because the design of the 2016 Honda CR-V is not defective and Honda is not obligated to equip every vehicle with all available technology.
Honda also argued that under New Jersey law, manufacturers are not liable “if the average consumer or user knew of the alleged unsafe properties of the product.”
Honda claims that drivers are aware of the need to keep their vehicles within the driving lane, as failure to do so could result in fatal consequences.
The Camden County Law Division of the New Jersey Superior Court rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments and determined that omitting these features did not make Honda vehicles unsafe.
The manufacturer’s responsibility is to provide a product that is reasonable, suitable and safe and it is not the manufacturer’s responsibility to install all available technology.
Ultimately, “the court concluded that plaintiffs did not prove that the 2016 Honda CR-V was unreasonably safe for its intended use and that there was no evidence of a design defect.”
Honda CR-V Collision Lawsuit Appeal
The plaintiff appealed the dismissal to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, which agreed with the lower court’s ruling.
The appeals court noted that the plaintiff never alleged that the steering system of the 2016 Honda CR-V was defective, nor did it warn of the apparent risk of allowing the vehicle to cross into another lane of oncoming traffic.
Plaintiff also does not deny that ordinary users of the vehicle recognize that the vehicle needs to maintain its lane and that it is unsafe to enter the lane of another vehicle traveling in the opposite direction.
According to the Court of Appeal, it is “undisputed” that drivers cannot rely solely on these driver aids.
The 2016 Honda CR-V owner’s manual states, “Like all assist systems, LDW has limitations… Over-reliance on LDW may result in a collision,” and that “(LKA) is not a substitute if you take your hands off the wheel or are unable to steer the vehicle. It just doesn’t work.”
In short, no one is claiming that the CR-V is a self-driving car.
According to the Court of Appeal:
“There is no evidence in the current record as to E. McNamara’s condition at the time of the fatal accident. There is also no evidence that she would have activated the LDW and LKA systems or that she would have responded to their warnings.”
The court ruled that the undisputed evidence in the case proved that the 2016 Honda CR-V was safe and fit to drive because it had a functioning steering system that allowed the driver to maintain the intended lane of travel.
“The vehicle did not become unsuitable or unsafe because it did not include all existing driver assistance technologies. Accordingly, we affirm the order of summary judgment against defendant American Honda Motor Co., Ltd. (Honda) with prejudice. Plaintiff’s product liability and negligence claims dismissed” — Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey
Honda CR-V Crash Lawsuit Is: Richard T. Belkoski v. Honda Motor Co., Ltd., etc.
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.