Gonzalez

Gonzalez v. Autoliv ASP, Inc.

Good Law
154 Cal. App. 4th 780·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1410·64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 908
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 27, 2007B188829California4,966 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cooper, J.

We reverse the entry of summary judgment in favor of Autoliv ASP, Inc. (Autoliv). Autoliv failed to provide any evidence negating the theory that the airbag it manufactured was defective under the risk-benefit theory of design defect. Therefore, the summary adjudication of Sister Guadalupe Gonzalez’s cause of action for strict products liability was error. The trial court correctly summarily adjudicated Gonzalez’s remaining causes of action for negligent products liability and breach of warranty.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On January 30, 2003, Gonzalez, a passenger in a 1998 Ford Taurus, suffered injury to her right eye as a result of a car accident. She sued the other driver, Ford Motor Company, Galpin Ford and several Doe defendants. Autoliv eventually was named as Doe 3 and is the sole respondent in this appeal. Autoliv manufactured the front airbag modules used in the 1998 Ford Taurus.

The complaint included causes of action for negligent and strict products liability and breach of warranty. Gonzalez “contends that the front airbag system in the vehicle was defectively manufactured or designed because the airbag allegedly deployed with excessive and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.