Stupid lawsuit of the week

[gae]

The family of a Garland girl who was accidentally killed last month when her father ran over her is suing a major car manufacturer for negligence.

On October 9, David Clemens backed up his Infiniti SUV and tragically ran over and killed two-and-a-half-year-old Adrianna.

"You just can't imagine the absence that is in our hearts right now with the loss of our daughter," mother Rachel Clemens said. "She rocked our world ... she was everything to us."

The family is suing Nissan, the parent company of Infiniti. They claim new back-up video cameras or sensors which detect objects behind a vehicle were available, and should have been installed in their SUV.

"This manufacturer was already putting it on some of its other vehicles, and it should have put it on this one," attorney Windle Turley said.

In a phone interview with News 8, Nissan/Infiniti spokesman Kyle Bazemore said the child's death was "very sad, very tragic," but added that even when an SUV comes equipped with a back-up video camera, it's not fool-proof.

"It's a convenience; it's not a substitute for proper reversing procedures," Bazemore said. "Drivers should always turn around and look."

"Yes, it's our responsibility, but so many tragic things have happened with children because of that," Rachel Clemens said.

Some research suggests as SUVs get bigger, so does the blind spot to the rear. Consumer groups estimate between 150 and 200 people - mostly toddlers - are killed in back-up accidents every year. Increasingly, consumers are demanding the new technology.

"As you can see, if you had a child laying on a tricycle or bicycle, laying behind you, you would be able to see that sitting in the driveway," said John Boyd of JR's Custom Auto as he demonstrated one of the back-up cameras.

"Our contention is that safety of this nature should not be optional, ever," Turley said.

The Clemens family believes if their SUV had a back-up camera, Adrianna would still be alive.

"She was my pride and joy," Rachel Clemens said. "She was a wonderful two-year-old that always had a smile on her face."

Turley said this is not just a case against Nissan; it's a case against the auto industry.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This lawsuit is beyond insane. When I started reading the article, I thought the sensors had failed.

But to sue because other vehicles have backup sensors and theirs didn't?!

[img]mad.gif[/img]

[jumper69]

"It's a convenience; it's not a substitute for proper reversing procedures," Bazemore said. "Drivers should always turn around and look."

"Yes, it's our responsibility, but so many tragic things have happened with children because of that," Rachel Clemens said.

Some research suggests as SUVs get bigger, so does the blind spot to the rear. Consumer groups estimate between 150 and 200 people - mostly toddlers - are killed in back-up accidents every year. Increasingly, consumers are demanding the new technology.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Does nobody see the absurdity in this? Especially where the mother says "yes it's our responsibility..."

That should be the end of it. It was HER responsibility. Fucking money grubbing SUV driving, pieces of shit for parents. [img]mad.gif[/img]

Here's a hint for them. STOP BUYING BIGGER AND BIGGER SUV's.

Hopefully this will be tossed before ever going to trial. I'm sorry for their loss but they lost their daughter because they were stupid. Not because Infiniti made a bad product.

[Gunslinger]

I guess it never crossed their minds to WATCH THE CHILD. What was that kid doing behind the SUV without parental supervision anyway?

[reason]

Ok...if I may offer a slightly opposing view.

I have a small SUV - a Honda CRV. It is nearly impossible to see directly behind me when backing out. As a matter of fact, I nearly backed over a neighbor child's bike laying in my driveway - until my neighbors shouted. Fortunately, I back out extremely slowly...just in case.

Now if the neighbor child had been sitting by the bike, and there was no one there to shout at me, I could very easily have crushed a child.

The point here is that I actually consider this a design flaw, because no matter how careful I am, I simply cannot see certain spots behind me. I think this problem is particularly persistent with regards to SUVs.

The question I have is, if this Infiniti has a similar issue with regards to rear view vision, and Infiniti designed the car and understands the problem...and if Infiniti actually manufactures the solution to this potentially deadly problem...

Shouldn't the technology to solve the problem be a standard feature on these vehicles?

I guess if I were selling a product and I knew the design of the product would result in above average occurrences of death, I would probably err on the side of caution and automatically provide the solution to the problem with the product.

Furthermore, Infiniti is high end. Comfort and safety should be expected in these types of vehicles. The buyer of such vehicles are less price sensitive and view amenities like these as reasons to purchase.

We do not know if the people involved in this case even knew if the technology was available when they purchased their SUV. They may not have been aware that this would be a problem. Maybe they purchased their Infiniti with the expectation that the higher price tag meant superior design.

I also am not sure how Infiniti sells its SUVs with regards to safety issues. If they advertise their SUVs as safe vehicles and Infiniti approved literature assures its customers safety, it can falsely lead consumers to buy their product without realizing some of the inherent dangers of their product.

Just my two cents worth.

<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 08, 2004 02:01 PM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>

[reason]

Originally posted by Gunslinger:
I guess it never crossed their minds to WATCH THE CHILD. What was that kid doing behind the SUV without parental supervision anyway?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't have children of my own, and that makes me extremely sensitive to the noise and activity of children when they are around.

One thing I have noticed is that there are very few parents who know exactly what their child is doing every last second. If I had a dollar for every time my brother, sister or their spouses said, "Where is...?" I'd be a wealthy man.

Some day I'll tell you the story of how I wondered off from a church festival in New Alsace, Indiana...at the tender age of three.

Take your eyes off a toddler for one second and...

Point here is that while the parents are responsible for their child, a product such as an SUV weighing a couple tons should designed for safe backing. Toddlers don't think about the weight of a moving car.

<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 08, 2004 01:46 PM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>

[reason]

One final thought for now:

I have concerns about a manufacturer selling a safety feature as an add on. To a certain extent it is an admission of a safety issue.

<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 08, 2004 01:59 PM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>

[gae]

Reason, since you don't have children, I'll give you a pass on your (almost ridiculous) comments.

So your CRV has a blind spot. My Audi has one and so does Trav's Tundra. So what? Every vehicle I've ever driven has a blind spot. As far as I'm concerned, that does not absolve me of responsibility if I back out of our driveway and hit a child. Or a bike. Or a cat or dog. (And that's NOT saying that some of the <s>cretins</s> youths that troll Georgia didn't tempt me.)

By the logic of the parents in the article, if flu shots are available and I choose against getting one, and then get the flu, I have a right to sue, because it was available . That's just BS.

If I had a dollar for every time my brother, sister or their spouses said, "Where is...?" I'd be a wealthy man.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Unless your brother, sister or their spouses are inattentive and uncaring parents, I'd bet that those words were uttered in a confined space.

[reason]

Reason, since you don't have children, I'll give you a pass on your (almost ridiculous) comments.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">gae, since I don't have children, I'm guessing from my reaction that I'm 100 times more sensitive and observant than the average parent I see in restaurants, stores and general public spaces. I'm sensitive to the noise children make, I'm sensitive the inappropriate running around, I'm ultra sensitive to all of it.

May I tell you how stressful a trip to McDonald's is on a Saturday afternoon?

In other words, the average parent sucks at keeping an eye on their brat every last moment of the day.

If anything, gae, I'm probably an expert on what typical parents don't do to restrain their children during every day activities, because it is ever so clear that the average parent is so fucking desensitized to it on an every day basis their kids become background noise.

Anymore during family events, I'm the one scolding nieces and nephews because their parents either can't or won't control what they're so accustomed to. And I'm not afraid to speak up in public places, either.

I'm famous for the extra loud EXCUSE ME!

<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 08, 2004 05:36 PM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>

[reason]

Unless your brother, sister or their spouses are inattentive and uncaring parents, I'd bet that those words were uttered in a confined space.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It doesn't negate the reality that kids run off the moment a parent's eye was taken off of them. And you've never seen me scold their kids - in front of them - when they wouldn't. I get sick of it.

I know, I know...you were the perfect parent. You never had a child run off during any single moment you were distracted. Nope. Never happened with gae. You never had a child run out into the street after a ball, never cross the street without looking. Because you were perfect, and your kids never did anything impulsively.

I think back to my childhood and the protective mom I had and there's no way in hell she could ever prevent some of the stuff we were confronted with, and I had a Disney childhood.

Quite frankly, we don't really know the definitive circumstances of what happened. But I see a lot of judging going on.

About New Alsace...I was three at a church festival, over an hour away from home. I remember turning around and not seeing my mom. So I walked back to the car, which was at the edge of the woods at the end of a large field filled with cars. I was there one second, gone the next in a crowd of people. I knew where I was, but panicked mom did not.

I got the biggest worry wart mom in the world. She took her eye off me for one second. Fortunately, New Alsace in 1966 was a place full of friendly old ladies willing to help out a very cute little boy wandering among the cars.

<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 08, 2004 05:37 PM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>

[reason]

So your CRV has a blind spot. My Audi has one and so does Trav's Tundra. So what? Every vehicle I've ever driven has a blind spot. As far as I'm concerned, that does not absolve me of responsibility if I back out of our driveway and hit a child. Or a bike. Or a cat or dog.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Every car has a blind spot of some sort. My CRV has a really big blind spot. I mean, there's a really big swath of vision I cannot see. The room for error increases dramatically.

I never had this problem with my Civic, my Corolla, my Camry. But it is a problem with my CRV. I would imagine it is just as bad - if not worse - in other SUV's.

If you are exercising reasonable caution when backing out with your vehicle - and you have no means by which to determine if there's anything behind you - that's a design flaw that should be rectified.