Expert testimony regarding an alternate design may not be admitted when it is speculative or unreliable; the expert did not test his proposed design; the design was not published for peer review; the design did not have a “known rate of error”; and the expert cannot show a general acceptance of his design or his methodology. Zaremba v. General Motors Corp, No. 03-7565, Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Feb. 13, 2004.

On March 18, 1996, the three plaintiffs (one driver and two passengers) were in a 1994 T-Top Pontiac Trans Am. The driver had a blood alcohol level of 0.172. None of the plaintiffs was wearing a seat belt. The evidence established that the driver was operating the Trans Am at a speed approaching 100 miles per hour. While driving at that speed, the driver approached a fork in the road, struck a curb, rolled and crashed into an overpass railing. The driver was killed, the back seat passenger suffered severe brain damage and the front seat passenger sustained soft tissue injuries. Prior to the accident, a previous owner had totaled the Trans Am, and one of the plaintiffs purchased it and arranged for it to be rebuilt.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]