Montgomery Personal Injury Lawyer - Automobile Accidents - Most Commented

A Dangerous RV Tire - The Goodyear 159 - Has Caused Problems

Tom Methvin — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:50:55 GMT

Beasley Allen Law Firm has handled numerous cases against tire manufacturers when their tires failed causing accidents and injuries. As you may know, one of the most serious types of failure of a steel belted radial tire is a de-tread and/or belt separation. Because of the stress concentrations and subsequent high internal temperatures at the edge of the belt, this area is particularly sensitive to manufacturing, design and material problems. One tire we have learned has experienced problems with de-tread due to manufacturing and design defects is the Goodyear G159 steel belted radial tire. The G159 is actually a heavy truck tire made specifically by Goodyear for recreational vehicles. Several manufacturers, including Fleetwood and Monaco, have equipped their larger or class A recreational vehicles with the Goodyear 159 tire. These RV manufacturers selected the Goodyear 159 tire for use on their RVs based on Goodyear's rating of the G159 and its recommendation that this tire was appropriate for these larger recreational vehicles.

Recreational vehicles are very popular in the U.S. for use during vacations. They are also a fan favorite in this part of the country during the football season. Tragically, several families' vacations have turned into virtual nightmares when a Goodyear 159 failed, experiencing a tread separation, which caused an RV to lose control and crash. Our firm currently represents two families who have owned RVs equipped with these Goodyear tires whose vacations where cut short and lives forever changed because of these defective and dangerous tires.

The problem with the G159 is that it's design and manufacturing process are inadequate for the expected loads on these big RVs. The G159s that we have examined have exhibited some of the worst failures we have seen. The design and manufacturing problems have led to tire tread and outer belt separations of G159 tires in all parts of the country. Our cases against Goodyear are still in the discovery phase. Goodyear, despite repeated request and motions filed with the different Courts, refuses to produce any documents or witnesses without having the Courts enter a "Secrecy Order" so that the problems with their tire can be kept confidential. Because Goodyear has not provided any discovery to date, in our cases, we still don't know the full extent of the design and manufacturing problems which are causing the G159 failures. However, we have learned that at least one RV manufacturer, Fleetwood, has recalled some of their RVs which were equipped with the G159 tires after learning of the problems with the tire. As a part the Fleetwood recall, it is replacing the G159 on its affected RVs with Michelin tires.

We have also learned that another RV manufacturer, Monaco, has initiated, along with Goodyear, a tire "Customer Satisfaction Change Over" program were it, along with Goodyear, has offered to replace the Goodyear 159 tires on some of their RVs with larger and stronger Goodyear tires. While Goodyear maintains that the tire change over was due to customer abuse of the G159, the change over program, or silent recall, at least acknowledges that the G159 tires are not safe for these big RVs. In addition, we have learned that there have been numerous customer complaints to NHTSA relating to these tires. Several owners of RVs have had their G159 tires fail and have been more fortunate than others to escape injury.

What we don't know is how many other claims have been filed against Goodyear. We also don't know how many RVs are currently being operated with G159 tires. What we do know is that several of the larger RVs are no longer being built as equipped with the G159. However, until Goodyear or the RV manufacturers institute a program to replace the G159 with safer tires, RV users will remain at risk.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Tom Methvin

Fatal two-car crash near Opp

Staff Writer — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:12:54 GMT

An 18-year-old graduate of Huntington High School died yesterday afternoon in a two-car accident on U.S. Route 331, just north of Opp, Alabama.

The tragic accident occurred at about 3:30 p.m. when five men, all recent Huntington High graduates, were traveling in a Chevrolet van and collided with a BMW carrying two people. Everyone in the accident was injured in some way.

In Huntington, the family of the graduate who died mourns the loss of their beloved family member.

Alabama State Troopers continue to investigate, but have not yet released information on the cause of the deadly motor vehicle accident.

This accident is a terrible reminder of the dangers that plague our nation's roadways every day.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Staff Writer

Law requires bus drivers to wear seatbelts

Staff Writer — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:25:28 GMT

If school bus drivers are required by law to wear seatbelts, why shouldn't the children riding in the same vehicle be required to wear them?

Some argue that the padding in the front and back of the seats is enough to protect the children during a motor vehicle accident with a sudden impact. However, in a serious accident such as the school bus accident that killed four teens and injured many more, the padding was obviously not enough.

In November's fatal school bus accident, the driver was not wearing his seatbelt, and he was thrown from the vehicle. Ironically, his failure to wear a seatbelt may have saved is life.

The debate over seatbelts on school buses continues among attorneys, lawmakers, school officials and parents. Take a look at two interesting articles today on the subject: one in The Huntsville Times and the other in The Brewton Standard.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Staff Writer

Katie Couric sounds off on school bus safety

Staff Writer — Mon, 04 Dec 2006 21:22:23 GMT

A December 4, 2006, post from "Katie Couric's Notebook" on CBSNews.com, Couric shares her view on the recent seat belts on school buses debate prompted by the tragic Alabama school bus accident that killed four students.

Couric says that about 17 thousand kids go to the emergency room each year as a result of school bus accidents, most of which occur while the students are getting on or off the bus. In the same breath, Couric states:

But a lot of SERIOUS injuries could be prevented by something that's standard in every American car -- seat belts. Buses, in most states, aren't required to have them.

While her thought of adding seat belts to school buses is well-intended, I'm wondering how she thinks the belts are going to help prevent the accidents that occur during loading or unloading. It seems that more than just seat belts are needed to protect our children. Maybe better training programs for drivers, more strict rules for students, and higher penalties for cars who disobey laws in school zones would also help make traveling by school buses safer for our children.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Staff Writer

Roof strength standard update on hold until Oct. 1

Scott Thomas — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:39:06 GMT

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was scheduled to release its amended and upgraded federal standard on vehicle roof strength requirements July 1. However, after input from a U.S. Senate hearing on June 4 that featured testimony from groups such as the People Safe in Rollovers Foundation, and which called for the proposal to be significantly strengthened, the NHTSA has delayed its announcement of the final roof strength standard to Oct. 1.

The original NHTSA proposal would upgrade the Federal Motor Vehicle Saftey Standard No. 216, extending coverage to vehicles with gross weight ratings up to 10,000 pounds, and requiring a roof withstand an applied force equal to 2.5 times the vehicle's weight while still maintaining sufficient headroom for an average adult male.

The upgrade would for the first time regulate the roof strength of many SUVs and pickup trucks, many of which are currently exempt under a 6,000-pound standard. The current requirement for roof strength is that a roof withstand applied force equal to only 1.5 times the vehicle's weight.

However, despite the suggested increases, research and consumer groups objected to the NHTSA proposal, saying the suggested new standard is still not tough enough to protect drivers and passengers. They call for a standard that would increase roof strength to withstand at least 3.5 times the vehicle's weight.

Results of a 2008 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research and communications organization, supports the call for a stronger standard. The study found that occupants in vehicles that meet the current strength requirements by a narrow margin have elevated injury risks compared to occupants in vehicles with stronger roofs. The IIHS estimates that a standard requiring roof strength to increase to a level of 3 or 3.5 times the vehicle's weight would save hundereds of lives each year.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Scott Thomas

Macon County Car Accident Injures Six

Shannon Weidemann — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:53:00 GMT

A holiday weekend car accident on Interstate 85 in Macon County injured six people on Sunday. They were all in a single vehicle headed north when the accident occured. No other vehicles were involved in the accident.

State Troopers say the driver lost control and ran into the median. All six people were in the same vehicle. Two of them were "seriously" injured, but their wounds do not appear to be life threatening.

Two of the victims were airlifted to a local hospital to be treated for their injuries. It is unknown what caused the car accident. Alabama State Troopers are still investigating the accident and no charges have been filed. The interstate was closed in both directions while the victims were being tended to and the accident scene was cleaned up.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Shannon Weidemann

Man Killed in Montgomery Car Accident

Shannon Weidemann — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 20:42:17 GMT

A 33-year-old man was killed in a car accident on Friday. The accident happened in Montgomery on Interstate 65. The driver lost control of his vehicle and hit a concrete barrier.

The area where the fatal crash occurred was in the northbound lane of I-65, beyond most of the construction hazards that have been a constant in the area since state highway crews began work on a widening and resurfacing project last year.

A spokesperson for the Alabama Department of Public Safety said Monday that preliminary reports don't indicate that construction hazards played any role in the fatal crash.

The victim was from Millbrook. There was no one else in the vehicle and it was a single car accident. Alabama State Troopers are still investigating the accident to find out the cause. It is unknown if the victim died at the scene.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Shannon Weidemann

Car Accidents in Alexandria Kills Two

Shannon Weidemann — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 13:30:13 GMT

Two men were killed in an Alexandria car accident on Wednesday evening. The victims were 19 and 20-years-old. There was a third person in the car that was injured.

It happened on Highway 431 near Wright’s dairy farm.

The southbound lanes were closed as crews cleaned up the scene.

No other vehicles were involved in the car accident. The accident is being investigated by Alabama State Troopers. It is unknown what condition the third victim is in. He is currently at Regional Medical Center undergoing treatment for his injuries.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Shannon Weidemann

Alabama Girl Scouts in Car Accident

Shannon Weidemann — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 15:13:00 GMT

Member of a Girl Scout troop from southern Alabama were involved in a single-car accident this week. The accident happened after a day of kayaking. The troop was making their way home in a caravan when when one of the vans was involved in an accident.

Brent says the girls were traveling in a caravan "They were all seat belted in. They were paying attention. The driver was paying attention, and just sort of over-corrected and went into the guard rail as we understand it," explained Brent.

Seven of the Girl Scouts were injured as well as the driver of the van. The most severe injuries involved a broken pelvis and a broken arm. Liz Brent, the CEO for the southern Alabama Girl Scouts, says they all understand the importance of wearing a seat belt much better now.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Shannon Weidemann

U.S. Senate Hearing tomorrow on 'roof crush' issue

Wendi Lewis — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:04:51 GMT

The U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Automotive Safety will convene tomorrow, June 4, for a hearing on the issue of "roof crush" in relation to driver and passenger safety in vehicle rollover accidents. The hearing is scheduled for 10-11:30 a.m. ET in Washington, D.C. Sen. Mark Pryor, chairman of the committee, called for the hearing after meeting with representatives of the non-profit People Safe in Rollovers Foundation, a citizen action group. He was particularly impressed with the group's Kevin Moody, whose son Tyler was killed in a vehicle rollover accident in 2003 as a result of roof crush.Under debate is an upgrade to the Federal Motor Safety Standard No. 216 (FMVSS 216), proposed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The proposal would require that a roof withstand an applied force equal to 2.5 times the vehicle's weight while maintaining sufficient headroom for an average size adult male, and extends coverage to vehicles with gross weight ratings up to 10,000 pounds.The current requirement is that the roof withstands an applied force equal to 1.5 times the vehicles weight, with a limit of 5,000 pounds for cars. The current standard also applies only to vehicles with ratings up to 6,000 pounds, which exempts nearly 45 percent of the SUV and pickup trucks currently on the road.People Safe in Rollovers Foundation is opposed to the NHTSA proposed standard because they say it is not strong enough. They believe it will not protect from the crushing of the roof into the occupant’s survival space in the event of a rollover accident, yet would protect automobile manufacturers from liability in the event of a roof crush injury or death, if the car were manufactured according to this standard. Their proposal calls for a standard that roofs withstand 3.5 times the vehicle’s weight.Scheduled to testify are one representative each from NHTSA, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Advocates for Highway Safety, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Public Citizen, and quadriplegic roof-crush victim Dr. David Garcia.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wendi Lewis