For The Defense, November 2012 - DRI Today
For The Defense, November 2012 - DRI Today
For The Defense, November 2012 - DRI Today
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Product Liability<br />
Be Armed with<br />
Good Science<br />
By Douglas R. Morr<br />
and Gary J. Heydinger<br />
Defending Claims<br />
Against ROV<br />
Manufacturers<br />
Reliable and scientifically<br />
valid information on<br />
how restraint systems<br />
work in real-world events<br />
can be the backbone of<br />
a strong defense against<br />
opinions based on<br />
inaccurate theories.<br />
One of the critical components of any successful product<br />
liability defense is comprehensive knowledge of the product.<br />
This includes having a firm understanding of the performance<br />
characteristics, capabilities, and limits of the<br />
product. Knowledge of this type coupled<br />
with an evaluation of the product under<br />
circumstances specific to a claimed event<br />
is desirable. Inaccurate opinions and<br />
accusations can be combated with clear,<br />
comprehensive, and credible scientific<br />
information. <strong>The</strong>se statements are true for<br />
all products, including Recreational Off-<br />
Highway Vehicles (ROVs).<br />
ROVs, also known as side by sides, differ<br />
from on-road passenger vehicles in<br />
both their intended uses and their features.<br />
In general, ROV customers want vehicles<br />
with superior levels of “off- roading” capability,<br />
the ability to maneuver through<br />
narrow spaces, and a tight, low-speed<br />
turning radius. Accordingly, ROVs are<br />
designed to travel over rough terrain with<br />
a track width narrow enough to fit on<br />
many existing off- highway trails. To satisfy<br />
this demand, manufacturers provide<br />
high ground clearances, large ranges of<br />
suspension deflections, large low- pressure<br />
tires, and responsive steering. Some consumers<br />
also want vehicles that are capable<br />
of higher speeds. This desire has led to the<br />
development of more powerful ROVs.<br />
As with many cases involving onhighway<br />
vehicles, accidents involving ROVs<br />
are often attributed to insufficient levels of<br />
stability or safety. Assertions such as “<strong>The</strong><br />
vehicle’s center of gravity height is too<br />
high and its track width is too narrow,”<br />
or “<strong>The</strong> vehicle’s tip-up resistance is not<br />
high enough,” or “<strong>The</strong> vehicle’s occupant<br />
restraint system is inadequate,” are often<br />
made regarding ROVs. Although these<br />
types of allegations are generally vague,<br />
they must be addressed to defend a product<br />
liability case successfully.<br />
Claims against ROV manufacturers stem<br />
from allegations of one or more occupants being<br />
injured while riding in an ROV, and purportedly<br />
involve one or more of the following:<br />
■ Douglas R. Morr, M.S., P.E., leads S-E-A’s Biomechanical Group in conducting investigations and research<br />
relative to injury mechanisms and causation. He oversees research and testing programs at S-E-A’s Research<br />
Center, including Roll Simulator testing of occupant response and protection, as well as Minor Impact Simulator<br />
and Drop Tower testing. Gary J. Heydinger, Ph.D., P.E., is the Director of Vehicle Dynamics for S-E-A,<br />
and was integral to the design of the Vehicle Inertia Measurement Facility (VIMF), which measures vehicle CG<br />
height, moments of inertia and SSF for automotive manufacturers and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s<br />
New Car Assessment Program.<br />
<strong>For</strong> <strong>The</strong> <strong>Defense</strong> ■ <strong>November</strong> <strong>2012</strong> ■ 73