Modern Camaro Forums banner

1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Supporting Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,668 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The car is a T Top car. IMO you take that risk just like when you decide to drive a vert. IMO it don't mean that the car should not be able to be made though. He didn't have to drive a T TOP Camaro.


http://www.setexasrecord.com/news/215775-quadriplegics-suit-against-gm-alleges-camaro-defectively-designed


Quadriplegic's suit against GM alleges Camaro defectively designed


11/6/2008 11:00 AM
By Michelle Massey, Texarkana Bureau



MARSHALL -- When driving his 1995 Camaro, Christopher Reddick's vehicle left the highway and overturned after he lost control. Reddick was severely injured and rendered a quadriplegic.

Alleging the car is dangerous and defective, Reddick believes General Motors is responsible for his injuries in failing to recall or change the body design of the T-top model Cameros.

Christopher Reddick and his parents, Terri Eubanks and David Reddick filed the motor vehicle product liability suit against General Motors Corporation on Nov. 4 in the Marshall Division of the Eastern District of Texas.

The complaint argues the 1995 Chevrolet Camaro is not reasonably crashworthy due to a lack of body structural integrity.

The complaint sates, "General Motors Corporation failed to adequately reinforce the vehicle to minimize body instability, including torquing, bending, twisting and intrusions into the driver's compartment."

Due to the alleged defects, the plaintiff claims that during the accident when the vehicle overturned, the roof pillars collapsed. Reddick believes General Motors could have incorporated a permanent rail to strengthen the structural members to prevent roof collapse.

The plaintiff states that the acts of failing to improve the Camaro are of a "gross and flagrant character in reckless disregard of the safety and welfare of consumers…"

Further the complaint asserts that the vehicle was defective and unreasonably dangerous because the "the interior components and padding within the vehicle were defectively designed and inadequate to provide a reasonably safe occupant system" and "the vehicle failed to provide reasonable head and spine protection to the driver of the vehicle."

Causes of action asserted against the defendant include strict liability, negligence, gross negligence, and breach of warranty.

Reddick is seeking special, incidental, and consequential damages for medical care and treatment costs, pharmaceutical expenses, wage, benefits and economic loss, and travel costs. The complaint is seeking general damages for past and future pain and suffering, permanent physical injury, mental anxiety, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life.

Terri Eubanks and David Reddick are seeking damages for emotional pain, loss of consortium, and pecuniary loss, including loss of care, maintenance, support, services, advice, and counseling.

Reddick's mother is also seeking damages to recoup monies spent on around the clock care, special transportation, and the substantial and necessary modifications she made to her home.

Longview attorneys John D. Sloan Jr., M. Raymond Hatcher, and Garrett Wilson of the Sloan, Bagley, Hatcher and Perry Law Firm are representing the plaintiffs.

U.S. District Judge T. John Ward will preside over the litigation.
 

·
Supporting Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,416 Posts
How exactly did he roll a camaro? I've never heard of anyone rolling a 4th gen unless excessive speeding was involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Gotta wonder the situation too.... what was he doing when his vehicle "left the road after he lost control"

kind of sounds like a "watch this" moment gone bad. I dont know all the details, but theres no mention of mechanical malfunction, and i know my car doesnt just "leave the road" for no reason.

sounds like he's just trying to cash in any way he can.

Edit: ^^ Exactly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
I bet he bought them **** thing because it HAD T-tops.:BangHead:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
897 Posts
This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen, don't get me wrong I feel bad for the guy, but all he's doing is trying to blame others for his problems. As stated above, he was likely screwing around to roll a Camaro, I mean come on its not like a top heavy SUV or something. What if he was in a convertible, what protection would he have then. Its not the car's fault, its just something that happens, sucks, and will have to be lived with.
 

·
Supporter of common sense
Joined
·
9,152 Posts
We don't have all of the information here (as usual from the media).
It is a safe assumption GM met every Federal mandate for vehicle safety in his 1995 Camaro. Not sure how much merit the case has after that.

They may be just going after a cash settlement to avoid court? Who knows...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
620 Posts
i wonder if he was even wearing his seat belt, this sounds like a case of a kid with a car that he couldnt handle. so many kids today have no clue how to drive correctly, i wouldnt be suprised to fid out that a cell phone might have played a part in this as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
471 Posts
Hey if you can sue McDonald's for making hot coffee... Does anyone take responsibility for themselves any more?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tazjetman

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,257 Posts
bah i don't think this quadrapeligic got a leg to stand on cuz like Lorcin said i think the guy was either speeding or just was doing something and forgot to wear his seatbelt :lol:
 

·
Supporting Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,668 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
bah i don't think this quadrapeligic got a leg to stand on cuz like Lorcin said i think the guy was either speeding or just was doing something and forgot to wear his seatbelt :lol:
That's just wrong.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top