TexasCHLforum.com

There is a very interesting possible side effect to this that most people may not realize. The fact that this is going to trial at all may cause a lot of automobile manufacturers to halt or greatly slow research into possible safety devices for cars. After all, if I have the technology and did not put it on every vehicle, I may be liable for a death. But if I don't have the technology, how can I be liable?

Is the next legal theory of liability going to be that I COULD have developed the technology earlier than I did, so a car that is in an accident that was made the year before I put the device in place is now also my fault? What about if I never develop the technology but some other car company does? If they refuse to license it am I at fault or are they?

This is a can of worms that I certainly hope the SCOTUS throws out.

philip964 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 11:33 am https://news.yahoo.com/arizona-supreme- ... 37087.html

Optional Safty feature was not bought by car buyer. Device not required by any law.

Car buyer makes a driving mistake, would have been corrected by device. Little girl in another car is killed.

Auto manufacturer is liable for her death.

Minor technical point, but the ruling is not that the auto maker is liable. The ruling was just that their preemption defense (a prior court ruling that the suit was preempted because no federal requirement to install the safety device) was not valid and the case can go to trial.