Pannu

Pannu v. Land Rover North America, Inc.

Caution
120 Cal. Rptr. 3d 605·191 Cal. App. 4th 1298·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 45
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 19, 2011No. B218173California9,964 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Perluss, J.

Sukhsagar Pannu suffered a severe spinal injury, resulting in quadriplegia, when his Land Rover Discovery (Series 1) sport utility vehicle rolled over following a chain of collisions on the 118 Freeway near Simi Valley. Pannu sued Land Rover North America, Inc., Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC, and Terry York Motor Cars, Ltd., doing business as Land Rover Encino (collectively Land Rover) alleging claims, among others, for strict liability based on defective design.

Following a bench trial, the court entered a judgment for $21,654,000 against Land Rover, finding stability and roof defects in the Discovery had caused Pannu’s injury. On appeal Land Rover contends a new trial is warranted because the trial court erred as a matter of law in applying the “consumer expectation” test for product liability, misapplied the alternative “risk-benefit” test, and abused its discretion in excluding certain evidence proffered by Land Rover. Land Rover also contends the court’s ruling was not supported by substantial evidence because no skid marks were found at the accident site, evidence it asserts necessarily must have been present had the rollover been caused by the alleged…

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.