- #RIX V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP DRIVERS#
- #RIX V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP FULL#
- #RIX V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP TRIAL#
Although Keefer was aware that the roadway and crosswalk were heavily trafficked by pedestrians, he had focused his attention solely to the left by looking through a space in the left side of the truck's frontal structure. The evidence showed that as he approached the crosswalk, he operated the truck in the forward mode at its top speed of approximately five to six miles per hour. In proceeding from one lot to the next, it became necessary for Keefer to drive the forklift across a walkway. On the morning of the accident, the subject forklift truck was being operated by Lake Keefer, a National employee, to unload steel coils from delivery trucks which were parked at various lots within the plant.
#RIX V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP DRIVERS#
It was common practice for forklift drivers at National to employ this technique when operating the trucks in the forward mode. The operator could overcome the impairment to visibility created by the frontal structure of the truck by constantly shifting his or her eyes and head to look between the crossmembers of the carriage. The lattice structure of the carriage was such that it partially obstructed the view of the lift operator when the vehicle was operated in the forward mode. The carriage consisted of a mast, chains, and hydraulic cylinder. The Clark forklift truck was a diesel-powered vehicle with a metal carriage attached to the front for the purpose of lifting and carrying heavy objects.
#RIX V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP FULL#
*603 (Truckmen), a full service leasing company, which had then leased it to Foley's employer, National Rolling Mills. Industrial, in turn, had sold the truck to Truckmen, Inc.
The forklift truck involved in the accident had been designed and manufactured by Clark Equipment Company (Clark) and had been sold by Clark to Industrial Lift Truck Company (Industrial), a distributor of Clark products. As a result of the collision, Foley sustained injuries which required the amputation of both legs. On April 25, 1977, William Foley was struck by a forklift truck while traversing a pedestrian crosswalk at the premises of his employer, National Rolling Mills (National).
#RIX V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP TRIAL#
Because the jury was precluded from considering evidence relevant for this purpose, a new trial will be granted. We conclude that evidence which tended to illuminate the conduct of the plaintiff and the conduct of the forklift operator prior to the accident was indispensable in determining the cause of the accident.
The trial court charged the jury that the inattention of the plaintiff and the inattention of the operator of a forklift truck could not be considered in determining the cause of a collision between the two because the action was based on an alleged defect in the design of the forklift truck.
Specifically at issue are jury instructions in which the trial court emphasized the importance of purging negligence concepts from the determination of design defectiveness in an action brought under the theory of strict products liability. In this appeal we are called upon to examine the role of negligence concepts in tort cases where strict liability has been asserted because of a product which, allegedly, was defectively designed. Zenoitis, Philadelphia, for appellee Clark Equipment Co.īefore CIRILLO, President Judge, and WIEAND and OLSZEWSKI, JJ. Short, Jr., Philadelphia, for appellants. FOLEYĬLARK EQUIPMENT COMPANY and Industrial Lift Truck Company and Truckmen, Inc.
0 kommentar(er)
