Opinion ID: 1462048
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Crashworthiness Defect in Design

Text: The amended complaint alleged that Mrs. Wolhar sustained injuries that were proximately caused by the negligent design of the seat in her car. The nature of those allegations challenges the crashworthiness of her 1987 Chevrolet Blazer. The term crashworthiness relates to the protection that a vehicle affords its occupants against injuries resulting from accidents. In a crashworthiness claim, a plaintiff does not seek compensation for injuries received from the initial collision between the vehicle and another object. Instead, the plaintiff seeks compensation for injuries that result from the second collision which occurs when the plaintiff strikes the interior of the vehicle or is thrown from the vehicle. LaHue v. General Motors Corp., 716 F.Supp. 407, 409 n. 1 (W.D.Mo.1989). Second collision injuries are often referred to as enhanced injuries. See Larsen v. General Motors Corp., 391 F.2d 495, 502 (8th Cir.1968); Lowe v. Estate Motors Ltd., 428 Mich. 439, 410 N.W.2d 706, 708 n. 4 (1987); see also DePaepe v. General Motors Corp., 33 F.3d 737, 742-43 (7th Cir.1994) (discussing divisibility of injuries). Thus, in a crashworthiness claim, the plaintiffs seek compensation for injuries over and above the injury that would have occurred as a result of the impact of collision, absent the vehicle's alleged negligently defective design.