Randal R. Palmer and Lynn I. Palmer, Individually and on Behalf of Anne Palmer, a Minor v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., Van-Trow Volkswagen, Inc., Volkswagen A.G. a/k/a Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft, and Volkswagen de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. a/k/a Volkswagen of Mexico

Summary

The Mississippi Supreme Court reviews evidentiary rulings in a wrongful-death product-liability action arising from injuries caused by a passenger-side air bag in a 1995 Volkswagen Jetta. The court holds that the trial court properly excluded portions of the owner's manual and National Transportation Safety Board materials, admitted accident-reconstruction videos, and limited expert testimony concerning air-bag dangers. The court affirms in part and reverses in part the Court of Appeals and remands in part.

Holdings

1. Reliance on a manufacturer's warning is not required when the claim is that a warning should have been provided but was absent. When the claim is that an issued warning was defective, however, the plaintiff must have read and relied on the defective warning. In either event, the plaintiff must prove proximate cause.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding the picture and caption from the owner's manual.
3. The trial court properly excluded the NTSB letter because plaintiffs did not adequately establish its relevance, authenticate it, or proffer the purpose for which it would be used; in any event, its exclusion was not sufficiently prejudicial to warrant reversal.
4. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting videos depicting sled tests with dummy occupants.
5. The trial court properly excluded Dr. Wogalter's testimony concerning the dangers posed by the Jetta's air bags to children because he lacked expertise in air-bag mechanics and the specific dangers involved, but properly permitted testimony about the visibility, effectiveness, and compliance of the sun-visor warnings.
6. Testimony is expert testimony when it requires scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge beyond that of a randomly selected adult, regardless of whether it is presented as fact or opinion. The trial court abused its discretion by allowing Miller to provide such technical testimony as a lay witness after defendants had not timely designated him as an expert.
7. Evidence of seat-belt nonuse may be admitted to show that a plaintiff would not have heeded an adequate warning, provided it has probative value independent of negligence, its probative value is not substantially outweighed by prejudice, no other evidentiary rule bars it, and the jury receives a limiting instruction prohibiting consideration of the evidence as negligence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether exclusion of a contradictory picture and caption from the Jetta owner's manual was an abuse of discretion in the inadequate-warning claim.
2. Whether exclusion of a National Transportation Safety Board safety-recommendation letter was reversible error.
3. Whether admission of videos depicting staged sled tests and dummy occupants was an abuse of discretion.
4. Whether the trial court properly limited or excluded expert testimony from Dr. Michael Wogalter and Myrna Kruckenburg.
5. Whether the trial court improperly allowed Greg Miller to provide specialized technical testimony as a lay witness despite his late designation as an expert.
6. Whether evidence of seat-belt use by Anne Palmer and the Palmer family was admissible to show whether they would have heeded adequate warnings.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded