Court Opinion

ID: 9464100
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 23:25:09.475256+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:38:27.571588
License: Public Domain

*924PER CURIAM:
The facts and circumstances surrounding this case are fully stated in the dissent. While the court agrees with much of Judge LeventhaTs scholarly opinion, we believe that the Government’s motion for summary judgment should have been granted by the District Court, not only on the issue whether a defect existed in the steering pitman arm of the 1959-60 model Cadillac automobiles, but also on the issue whether the defect was related to motor vehicle safety. The evidence is uncontradicted that General Motors sold six times as many pitman arm replacements for the 1959-60 Cadillac models as for adjacent model years; that steering pitman arm failures have occurred while these models were being driven; and that when the steering pitman arm fails the driver loses control of the car. We hold that, under the statute, these uncontradict-ed facts demonstrate an “unreasonable risk of accidents” stemming from the defect. 15 U.S.C. § 1391(1) (1970).
The judgment of the District Court is reversed and these cases are remanded for determination of appropriate relief.

So ordered.