Colin Kelly, partner in the firm’s Products Liability and Litigation & Trial Practice Groups, was quoted in Law360 in an article titled “GM’s Fate Rests on Reason for Ditching Defect Fix.”
The article discussed the GM case involving its failure to fix the ignition-switch defect and how the automaker can thwart plaintiffs’ accusations by showing it believed the proposed fixes wouldn’t have been effective.
According to the article, a court is more likely to admit cost-benefit analyses if they show a concerted effort on the part of the company to use human-life valuations to forgo fixes.
"It depends if we're talking about a single document or a whole team of people discussing it over a long time, making human-life valuations," Kelly said.
"That’s something that plaintiffs will definitely try to portray as outside the normal scope of what a reasonable company should do."
The article discussed the GM case involving its failure to fix the ignition-switch defect and how the automaker can thwart plaintiffs’ accusations by showing it believed the proposed fixes wouldn’t have been effective.
According to the article, a court is more likely to admit cost-benefit analyses if they show a concerted effort on the part of the company to use human-life valuations to forgo fixes.
"It depends if we're talking about a single document or a whole team of people discussing it over a long time, making human-life valuations," Kelly said.
"That’s something that plaintiffs will definitely try to portray as outside the normal scope of what a reasonable company should do."