Kim v. American Honda Motor Company, Incorporated

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · November 7, 2023 · No. 22-40790

Summary

In a Texas products liability design defect case arising from a far-side impact injury in a side-impact collision, the Fifth Circuit affirmed a jury verdict against Honda. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting plaintiffs' expert testimony under Daubert, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding that a center airbag or reverse geometry seatbelt was a safer alternative design. The court also held that the Texas presumption of nonliability (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 82.008) was inapplicable because no federal safety standard governed the specific product risk—"the risk of injury from a far-side impact during a near-side collision"—which was a question of law for the court, not the jury.

Holdings

  1. No, the district court did not abuse its discretion. The experts' testimony was reliable and relevant, and Honda's challenges went to the weight, not admissibility.
  2. No, there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that both a center airbag and a reverse geometry seatbelt were safer alternative designs that were economically and technologically feasible.
  3. No, the district court properly defined the product risk as 'the risk of injury from a far-side impact during a near-side collision' and correctly concluded that no federal standard governed that risk, so the presumption was inapplicable.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Honda's motions to exclude the expert testimony of Dr. Mariusz Ziejewski and Neil Hannemann.
  2. Whether the district court erred in denying Honda's motion for judgment as a matter of law on the ground that there was insufficient evidence of a safer alternative design.
  3. Whether the district court erred in defining the product risk as 'the risk of injury from a far-side impact during a near-side collision' and denying Honda's requested jury instruction on the Texas statutory presumption of nonliability under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 82.008.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (23)

  • Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993)(cited)
  • Hodges v. Mack Trucks, Inc., 474 F.3d 188 (5th Cir. 2006)(cited)
  • Bear Ranch, L.L.C. v. Heartbrand Beef, Inc., 885 F.3d 794 (5th Cir. 2018)(cited)
  • Knight v. Kirby Inland Marine, Inc., 482 F.3d 347 (5th Cir. 2007)(cited)
  • Janvey v. Dillon Gage, Inc. of Dallas, 856 F.3d 377 (5th Cir. 2017)(cited)
  • Abraham v. Alpha Chi Omega, 708 F.3d 614 (5th Cir. 2013)(cited)
  • Baisden v. I'm Ready Prods., Inc., 693 F.3d 491 (5th Cir. 2012)(cited)
  • Threlkeld v. Total Petroleum, Inc., 211 F.3d 887 (5th Cir. 2000)(cited)
  • Goodner v. Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd., 650 F.3d 1034 (5th Cir. 2011)(cited)
  • Price v. Marathon Cheese Corp., 119 F.3d 330 (5th Cir. 1997)(cited)

Showing top 10 of 23.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…