Chicago Car Accident Lawyer Blog

John J. Perconti of Levin & Perconti has filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Kane County, Illinois on behalf of a woman who was killed in a serious car accident last fall. The 32-year-olc woman’s vehicle was hit by a truck, causing her to crash into the Illinois Department of Transportation dump truck in front of her. The woman is survived by her husband and 3-year-old son, who were both seriously injured in the truck accident. The truck driver was reportedly under the influence of marijuana and half of the brakes on his semitrailer were deemed out of alignment and inadequate for stopping. Although criminal charges have not been filed yet, the death has been ruled a homicide.

For the Northwest Herald article, click here.
For the Daily Herald article, click here.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accident , Design Defect in Vehicle , Injuries to Minors and Children , Levin & Perconti In the News , Levin & Perconti in the News , Truck Accident , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Defectively designed floor mats may be to blame for some car accidents that occur. In some cases, pedals have stuck to the mats, causing car accidents. In others, the mats interfered with one or more pedals.

For the full article.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accident , Design Defect in Vehicle

Bookmark:

The Illinois 1st District Appellate Court vacated a direct verdict for GM and remanded the matter for trial, finding that the plaintiff did present enough evidence of a design defect to warrant product liability. In 1999, the plaintiff sustained a severe burn injury after the rear seat of his van exploded into flames after trying to start the van for 10 minutes. At trial in the Cook County Circuit Court, the plaintiff alleged that the design defect rendered the van a fire hazard, but the jury found in favor of GM. The appeals court, however, ruled that GM should have tested the van in order to detect the defect and prevent automobile accidents, and the fact that the victim repeatedly tried to start the van was an act an ordinary consumer would perform without “expect[ing] the interior of the van to ignite.” The plaintiff’s expert presented sufficient evidence to support that specific industry standards of care were not met for the particular defects he identified.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Design Defect in Vehicle , Verdicts and Settlements

Bookmark: