in 1992 alexis geier suffered seriouse injuries in an accident while driving her 1987 honda. she was wearin the seatbelt she sued the honda under state product laws.saying the car was defected b/c it wasn't equipped with driver side air bag. u.s transportation Department standards required an air bag by 1989 with other advances to be phased over time. ((( is Geier's state proudect liability actin blocked by the federal governmen't rule that didn't mandate air bag until after her car was produced? explain
2007-11-24 01:45:19 · 5 answers · asked by love-love 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Most likely. Think about not just that car, but how many other older cars are out there on the roads. Although they may not be as common in a lot of areas, they're still around. Think about those '50s classics and all of the features that they are missing. If they could sue for safety parts missing that are required by modern day laws, they'd probably pass a law stating that one could not do so because there would be a lot more lawsuits!
Why would the first answer assume that you were a lawyer? If he knew any better, he would probably also have to assume that since this case was probably taken to a higher court of law considering the parties included, any appeal would strictly be a review of any thing said/done in the court. That was kind of mean. If you were a lawyer, you would already know the codes that defend Honda and wouldn't need to ask the Yahoo community.
2007-11-24 02:02:44 · answer #1 · answered by japamy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i would say because the car was made in 1987 that Geier would not be able to sue Honda because the law was made in 1989 and that means there is a possibility the car would not have a passenger side airbag
2007-11-24 09:50:54 · answer #2 · answered by foxtrott 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on her state's laws. If airbags were required equipment in 87, she might have a case unless her car came from another state and there is no law in her state requiring an airbag upgrade.
Generally, federal law superceeds state law when the federal law is stricter, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
2007-11-24 09:53:53 · answer #3 · answered by Pragmatism Please 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably, or else all cars would have been 'recalled' to add the additional advances. Anytime you have a car accident you risk injury, sounds like she didnt have insurance and is trying to get money...good luck with that
2007-11-24 09:50:08 · answer #4 · answered by ~Just 1 good egg~ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a really good website that I have used for legal advice ... they are lawyers who answer your questions. Give it a try - it has helped me a lot over the years.
www.freeadvice.com On the front page, click on 'accident law'
Good luck.
2007-11-24 09:52:15 · answer #5 · answered by ValleyR 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋