LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

SHAUNA ALAMI, &C. v VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA, INC Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: SHAUNA ALAMI, &C., State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>I02_0018, Injuries, Vehicle, Drunk Driving, Barker, Ny2d, Duty, Manning, Suit, York, Collision, Humphrey, Criminal Act, Preclusion, Violation, Product Liability, Utility Pole, Blood Alcohol, Intoxication, Public Policy, Barker/manning Rule, Design Defects, Summary Judgment, Summary Judgment Motion, Illegal Act, Negligence, Preclusion Doctrine , ContentID: 120251773

Case Documents
1   OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 125682
10 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 10 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
LAW
VEHICLE
DRUNK DRIVING
BARKER
PLAINTIFF
NY2D
DUTY
MANNING
SUIT
YORK
COLLISION
HUMPHREY
COURT
CRIMINAL ACT
PRECLUSION
VIOLATION
PRODUCT LIABILITY
UTILITY POLE
BLOOD ALCOHOL
INTOXICATION
PUBLIC POLICY
BARKER/MANNING RULE
DEFENDANTS
DESIGN DEFECTS
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION
ILLEGAL ACT
NEGLIGENCE
PRECLUSION DOCTRINE


   2 No. 15
   Shauna Alami, &c.,
   Appellant,
   v.
   Volkswagen of America, Inc.,
   Respondent.
     _________________________________________________________________

   2002 NY Int. 18

   February 19, 2002

   This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
   in the New York Reports.

   Fred R. Profeta, Jr., for appellant.
   David B. Hamm, for respondent.
   Product Liability Advisory Council; Mothers Against Drunk Driving,
   amici curić.
     _________________________________________________________________

   WESLEY, J.:

   In the early morning hours of May 10, 1995 Silhadi Alami was driving
   home alone in his Volkswagen Jetta on the Saw Mill River Parkway in
   Yonkers. Traveling at approximately 35 miles per hour, the Jetta left
   an exit ramp and collided with a steel utility pole. Alami died as a
   result of his injuries -- fractures of the ribs, rupture of the liver
   and massive internal hemorrhaging. At the time of the collision, his
   blood alcohol content exceeded the limits set forth in Vehicle and
   Traffic Law § 1192(2).

   Alami's widow commenced this action against Volkswagen of America,
   Inc. seeking to recover damages on the theory that a defect in the
   vehicle's design enhanced decedent's injuries. Volkswagen moved for
   summary judgment arguing that decedent's intoxication was the sole
   cause of the crash and that no defect or malfunction in the Jetta
   caused or contributed to it. In light of Alami's intoxication at the
   time of the accident, Volkswagen also asserted that plaintiff's claim
   was precluded on public policy grounds. Volkswagen's motion did not
   address whether plaintiff could sustain her claim that the vehicle was
   defective.

   In opposing the motion, plaintiff submitted an affidavit and report
   from an expert who had inspected the vehicle, autopsy report,
   photographs of the scene, police report and crash test results from
SNIPPETS:
  • Product Liability Advisory Council; Mothers Against Drunk Driving,
  • At the time of the collision, his blood alcohol content exceeded the limits set forth in
  • Alami's widow commenced this action against Volkswagen of America, Inc. seeking to recover
  • Volkswagen moved for summary judgment arguing that decedent's intoxication was the sole cause
  • In opposing the motion, plaintiff submitted an affidavit and report from an expert who had
  • The expert asserted that due to structural deficiencies in the manufacture of the vehicle,
  • The court applied our holdings in Barker v Kallash (, 63 NY2d 19) and Manning v Brown to
  • Volkswagen and amici argue that plaintiff's claim should be precluded on public policy
  • Relying on Humphrey v State of New York and our analysis in Barker and Manning plaintiff
  • In Barker, we noted that "the public policy of this State generally denies judicial relief to
  • In Humphrey, the State sought to characterize plaintiff's intoxication -- comparable to
  • We specifically rejected the State's position noting that "he fact that decedent's ability to
  • Plaintiff does not contest Volkswagen's assertion that Alami's intoxication was the cause of
  • While we might quarrel with the dissent over whether a plaintiff's illegal conduct must be a
  • The Barker/Manning rule is premised on public policy.
  • We refuse to extend its application beyond claims where the parties to the suit were involved
  • Volkswagen's motion for summary judgment did not dispute the viability of plaintiff's claim
  • Indeed, in its submission to Supreme Court in support of its summary judgment motion,
  • This latter categorization imposes a vexing limitation on the preclusion doctrine and is
  •    |