Opinion
No. 99-0586. (REF: ALL CASES) Section "L" (5) Civil Action.
November 2, 2001
ORDER REASONS
Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion in limine to limit consideration of comparative fault For the following reasons, Plaintiff's motion is DENTED.
I. BACKGROUND
This diversity suit arises out of an automobile accident that occurred on December 31, 1998 on Interstate 10 in St. Charles Parish, Louisiana. A 1990 Plymouth Acclaim owned by Rhonda Beasley and operated by Plaintiff Robert Allen, Jr. was allegedly in the emergency stopping lane of eastbound I-10 with a flat tire, when it was struck by a Ryder truck operated by defendant Danni Naor and owned by defendant Ryder. The car operated by Plaintiff Allen burst into flames, killing his mother, Ora Tolliver, and Rhonda Beasley's two children, Cedrica Daniels and Michael Beasley, who also occupied the car. Allen was severely burned and paralyzed; Rhonda Beasley was injured less seriously.
Plaintiffs have recently reached a settlement agreement with many of the original named defendants in this consolidated case, including Ryder and Naor's employer, American Transfer Moving. The Court recently severed the third-party claim of American Transfer Moving against The Dorfman Organization and the only remaining issues for trial are Plaintiffs' products liability claims against DaimlerChrysler. In their products liability claim, Plaintiffs generally allege two defects in the 1990 Plymouth Acclaim. First, Plaintiffs claim that Robert Mien's seatback deflected rearward, causing a spinal injury which left him paraplegic. Second, Plaintiffs contend that the car's fuel system was defectively designed, resulting in a post-collision fire that fatally burned the three passengers seated in the backseat at the time of the accident.
II DISCUSSION
Plaintiffs seek to preclude jury consideration or determination of the fault of any alleged torfeasors. other than the driver of the truck, Danni Naor and the Defendant, DaimlerChrysler. Plaintiffs argue that because this case involves only claims of products liability and "crashworthiness," and the resulting "enhanced damages," an allocation of fault and damages among all tortfeasors is not appropriate. Plaintiffs seek to distinguish between the damages attributed to the "initial collision" and the damages attributed to the so-called "second collision," i.e., the failure of the vehicle upon impact.
Plaintiffs offer to stipulate that Danni Naor, the driver of the truck, was negligent caused the initial collision, but argue that the negligence of any other tortfeasors should no considered by the jury because the claim against DaimlerChrysler relates only to "enhance damages" beyond those attributable to the original accident.
Plaintiffs cite numerous decisions, from Louisiana courts and other state and federal courts, recognizing the validity of a "crashworthiness" cause of action and addressing the burden of proof in such cases. Plaintiffs submit that in these cases, where plaintiffs seek "enhanced damages" for new and exacerbated injuries caused by the alleged failure of the vehicle after the initial collision, "the negligence of other defendants is simply too remote to the event to be relevant to determine the extent of the enhancement of injury." See Memorandum in Support of Motion to Limit Consideration of Comparative Fault at 6. Thus, Plaintiffs argue that while the "personal negligence of Mr. Naor can be quantified and considered," any negligence on the part of other parties "must be subsumed into Naor's responsibility for the initial impact" and should not be considered or quantified by the jury. See id. at 13.
In opposition, Defendant argues that this case simply requires application of Louisiana's law of comparative fault. See Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion to Limit Consideration of Comparative Fault at 2. According to the Defendant, "the damage for which Plaintiffs sue has multiple causes," and under Louisiana law, "the fault of all persons responsible for an accident and resulting damage must be compared." See id. Accordingly, Defendant seeks to present evidence at trial of the negligence of several alleged joint tortfeasors, including Danni Naor, the driver of the injuring truck, American Transfer Moving, Naor's employer, Ryder TRS, Inc., the owner and lessor of the truck, and the Louisiana State Police.
Louisiana courts recognize the doctrine of "enhanced damages" and have consistently held that "a cause of action exists, not only against one tortfeasor for the initial accident, but also against a subsequent tortfeasor for aggravation of the original injury, regardless of whether or not the subsequent tort caused the original accident" See Boubel v. Gilardi, 532 So.2d 948, 951 (La.App. 5th Cir. 1988); see also Moore v. Chrysler Corp., 596 So.2d 225, 238 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1992). Courts equally recognize, however, that "[t]his conclusion . . . does not by any means absolve the initial tortfeasor[s] of responsibility." See Moore, 596 So.2d at 238. Rather, the initial tortfeasors "cannot be absolved of responsibility just because someone else's fault served to worsen the injury." See id. Accordingly, in crashworthiness cases, Louisiana courts consider the fault of all tortfeasors, "not merely the tortfeasor whose conduct enhanced the injury." See Busse v. Bayerische Motoren Werke, A.G., 1997 WL 106716, at *2 (E.D. La. 1997).
Consideration of the fault of all tortfeasors in crashworthiness cases is consistent with Louisiana's "pure" comparative fault regime. Louisiana Civil Code article 2323 sets forth this system of comparative fault, providing that "[i]n any action for damages where a person suffers injury, death, or loss, the degree or percentage of fault of all persons . . . shall be determined, regardless of whether the person is a party to the action or a nonparty, and regardless of the person's insolvency, ability to pay . . . or that the other person's identity is not known or reasonably ascertainable." See La. Civ. Code art. 2323 (emphasis added). Comparative fault applies in products liability cases and in cases where the conduct of a subsequent tortfeasor significantly enhanced the original injuries. See Moore, 596 So.2d at 238-39.
In this case, Plaintiffs seek to distinguish a crashworthiness case from other "simple negligence cases" and argue that conduct by other tortfeasors such as "renters, instructors, policemen, or employers" is "peripheral" and "irrelevant" to a determination of the liability of DaimlerChrysler. Plaintiffs attempt to isolate the damages attributable to DaimlerChrysler from those caused by the initial collision. However, the complex facts of this case preclude such a simple demarcation of the various possible causes of the Plaintiffs' injuries and deaths. Both Mr. Allen's spinal injury and the fire could have been the result of either the initial collision, or the alleged design defects, or both. The parsing of the causes of these injuries and the allocation of damages is riddled with complicated issues of fact that are properly reserved to the trier of fact.
Moreover, characterizing this case as a crashworthiness products liability action does not justify deviation from the general principles of comparative fault set forth in the Louisiana Civil Code. See, e.g., Busse, 1997 WL 106716, at *2 ("The court rejects Plaintiffs argument that the harms attributable to the crashworthiness of the vehicle are divisible from the causes of the accident . . . all the causal elements which contributed to the harms at issue are relevant to the jury's determination and allocation of fault."); see also Page v. Gilbert, 598 So.2d 1110, 1118 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1992) (apportioning fault in crashworthiness case between tortfeasor driver and manufacturer of vehicle). This Court likewise finds that under Louisiana law, the comparative fault of other tortfeasors, not presently before the Court, is properly to be considered and apportioned by the jury. Accordingly, Plaintiffs motion to limit consideration of comparative fault is DENIED.
III. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs motion to limit consideration of comparative fault is DENIED.
Done this 2nd day of November, 2001, New Orleans, Louisiana.