But of course, it only works when properly constructed. In the case of Quilez-Velar v. Ox Bodies, Inc., the allegation was that the underride guards affixed to a tractor-trailer in San Juan, Puerto Rico failed in their main functional objective: To keep a car from riding up underneath a large truck. This resulted in the death of a young mother, who was driving with her toddler son.

A product liability lawsuit was filed against the maker of the company. While a jury decided the case in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of $6 million, jurors also apportioned 80 percent of the fault to the city of San Juan – which was a non-party in the injury lawsuit. This was bad news for plaintiff’s in their wrongful death lawsuit because it meant that the $6 million damage award would be reduced to just $1.2 million. Plaintiff, representative of decedent’s estate, appealed.

According to court records, the crash occurred Oct. 1, 2010, when a 28-year-old married woman was driving her toddler son on a highway overpass in her Jeep Liberty. The Jeep collided with a large, slowly-moving truck operated by employees of the City of San Juan. The truck had an underride guard that was affixed to its rear. That feature was manufactured by a company called ox Bodies.

The Jeep struck the truck from behind and underrode the body of the truck. The back of the truck penetrated the Jeep, causing lacerations to the victim’s head and face. She died five days after the truck accident.

Her family members filed a lawsuit in a Puerto Rico court, alleging negligence and seeking damages from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority, Integrand Insurance Company and the City of San Juan. The city and its insurer later filed a third-party complaint for indemnification against the company that made the underride guards.

the city and its insurer deposited the $500,000 contribution for potential distribution if it was found liable. A court in Puerto Rico ordered that money distributed to plaintiffs and dismissed the city from the lawsuit. There was not a formal settlement, and therefore no release of liability.

An amended complaint by plaintiff was filed in federal court against the manufacturer of the underride guard.The company then filed a third-party action for indemnification against the city, at which point the city noted the $500,000 payment it had already made. Federal court judge then dismissed the city from the proceedings. The case continued with the product manufacturer as the sole defendant.

Plaintiffs asserted design of the underride guard was defective because it was too small – 16 inches on either side were left unprotected. Additionally, the guard wasn’t designed to adequately withstand impacts with loads that exceeded 7,000 pounds.

Following a 12-day trial, jurors returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $6 million, but determined the city was 80 percent liable, so defendant manufacturer was only responsible for 20 percent of the damage award, or $1.2 million

Both parties appealed, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed, though it certified a question on damages to the Puerto Rico court.

If you have been a victim of a traffic accident, call Chalik & Chalik at (954) 476-1000 or 1 (800) 873-9040.

Additional Resources:

Quilez-Velar v. Ox Bodies, Inc., May 9, 2016, U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

More Blog Entries:

Fort Lauderdale Car Accident Proves Fatal for Two, May 5, 2016, Miami Car Accident Lawyer Blog

The key points in the new package include a $15 billion budget boost to the VA, a “Veterans Choice Card,” and, potentially, leases on 27 new medical centers in fifteen states and Puerto Rico (another $1.27 billion).

The centerpiece of the “Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act” (HR 3230) is a $10 billion Veterans Choice Fund. Over the next three years, VA is to use the fund to buy care from non-VA care providers for veterans if they face long waits longer than 30 days for VA care or if they reside more than 40 miles from a VA medical center.

The goal: to eliminate the egregiously long VA patient wait list, which some VA health administrators and staffed conspired to hide in recent years.

Per the request of some VA leaders and veteran service organizations, HR 3230 also authorizes $5 billion for VA to expand its own capacity to deliver care, by hiring more medical and support staff and also building and leasing more space. This $5 billion will be paid for by cuts elsewhere, including cuts to executive bonuses and deferring planned rate cute for certain VA home loans.

However, the “Veterans Choice Card,” which the legislation mandates, is not the golden ticket that it sounds like for veterans seeking outside care. Veterans not already enrolled in VA health care won’t gain accelerated access to outside care as promised by the legislation, unless they serve in areas of combat operations within five years of enrollment.

The choice card will mostly act as an informational insurance card presented to non-VA health care providers to identify the veteran and to verify eligibility for care that, sometime earlier, were arranged through and approved by a VA coordinator.

Also, not all eligible veterans will get to choose their outside provider, and not every outside provider will opt to treat veterans through the VA coordinated care program – even if the vets are existing patients. The issues for outside physicians include the level and timeliness of VA payments. The new legislation does include language seeking to improve VA payment procedures so that payments are timelier.

VA has existing contracts with individual physicians and with pools of private sector providers, and additional similar arrangements are expected. But, VA cannot pay rates higher than Medicare allows, with exceptions possible if care is delivered in rural areas.

Many question marks remain with this legislation and how it might be implemented. It certainly does not represent a cure-all for the VA’s problems, however it does include some near-term action. You can read more on this story in Stars & Stripes: http://www.stripes.com/news/veterans/how-choice-card-and-15b-will-help-veterans-get-care-1.296110

Legal Help for Veterans, PLLC fights for veterans rights. We fight to make sure you get the benefits you deserve from the Department of Veterans Affairs. To learn more or contact an attorney about your PTSD, TBI, Mental Health, Sexual Assault, Hearing Loss and Tinnitus, TDIU, Medical Malpractice, or Aid and Attendance claim, visit http://www.legalhelpforveterans.com/ or call 800.693.4800

The Governors Highway Association indicates 41 states, plus Washington, D.C., the Virgin Islands, Guam and Puerto Rico now all have laws in place banning texting while behind the wheel of a vehicle.

There are 14 states that not only have a ban on texting while driving, but have taken the law one more step by banning hand-held e-devices altogether. One state, Tennessee, bans reading or sending messages while a driver is in motion, but they may text while stopped at a red light. They also allow drivers to talk on cells while driving.

Many pundits feel that in the near future, Tennessee will take a look at their traffic accidents statistics and decide a complete ban may make more sense. Other states are still trying to decide whether to impose more laws on their citizens or not, while federally, the U.S. Transportation Secretary wholeheartedly supports a federal ban.

The nine states that are still trying to determine which way to go on the texting while driving issues are Texas, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Arizona, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, South Dakota and Missouri.

Banning what people see as their “right” to use cellphones and other mobile devices is always a hot button issue. However, even those who oppose this type of ban agree that something needs to be done to reduce the death toll as a result of distracted driving.

If you have been in an accident involving a distracted driver, contact an Austin personal injury lawyer for assistance in making a claim to the courts for compensation for your injuries.

Lee, Gober and Reyna – If you need a personal injury lawyer or help with an auto accident, motorcycle accident, wrongful death, or burn injury case, contact Lee, Gober and Reyna by visiting http://www.lgrlawfirm.com or calling 512.478.8080