Business Case Study
Essay Preview: Business Case Study
Report this essay
Croskey v. BMW of North America, Inc
The parties: Croskey and BMW of North America
The plaintiff: Croskey
The defendant: BMW of North America
The appellant: Croskey
The appellee: BMW of North America
The court trial was won by Croskey
William Croskey was badly burned by hot anti-freeze after the plastic radiator neck of a 1992 BMW failed and sprayed fluid on him when he opened the hood of the car. Croskey brought defective design, negligence and gross negligence claims against BMW of North America, Inc.
The Court of Appeals disagreed with the District Courts refusal of Croskeys evidence of four non-BMW mechanics as to the dangers of using plastic for a radiator neck to establish the design defect claim. Such testimony should have been admissible to prove a defect. However, the appellate court agreed with the District Court in not allowing such testimony to prove Croskeys failure to warn claim, as these mechanics did not report any concerns or failures to BMW.
Further, the appellate court affirmed the trial courts ruling allowing evidence of dissatisfaction on the part of three witnesses for plaintiff over settlements they received on their claims against BMW for the purpose of demonstrating the bias of the witnesses, even though settlement evidence generally is not admissible.
After further motions and discussions, the district court ruled that plaintiff could put on evidence of similar incidents only to prove his “failure to warn” negligence theory and could not use such evidence to prove the “design defect” negligence theory. The court also limited the admissible incidents to those occurring before plaintiffs accident in July 2000, those that were “substantially similar” to the incident at issue and only those of which BMW had notice.
This is a legal issue for one, someone did get injured and two it made it to court, therefore the court found it to be legal issue.
I think BMW was knew about the plastic neck for the radiator and failed to recall. They should have been proactive after they found out about the defect. It is unfortunate that Croskey was injured but if BMW would have taken previous advice to correct the matter they wouldnt have been sued or found liable.