 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hernandez-Gomez v. Leonardo11/1/1994
reempts no common-law liability. United States v. Menasche, 348 U.S. 528, 538-39, 75 S. Ct. 513, 520, 99 L. Ed. 615 (1955) (courts have a duty to give effect to every clause in a statute, if possible).
Thus, our analysis of preemption by the Safety Act ends with a reading of the text of the preemption clause and its companion, the savings clause. The two clauses act harmoniously to forbid states from enacting conflicting standards while allowing common-law tort actions. We believe Cipollone requires this result and are secure in the knowledge that our construction of this federal statute is not the last word.
Conclusion
The Safety Act does not preempt Plaintiff's action for defective design of a federally approved restraint system. The Safety Act's savings clause expresses Congress' intent to allow state common-law claims against automobile manufacturers whose safety restraint systems comply with federal minimum performance standards but are unreasonably dangerous to consumers. Thus, the trial court erred in granting VW's motion for partial summary judgment. We vacate the order granting the motion and remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
STANLEY G. FELDMAN, Chief Justice
CONCURRING:
JAMES MOELLER, Vice Chief Justice
ROBERT J. CORCORAN, Justice
THOMAS A. ZLAKET, Justice
FREDERICK J. MARTONE, Justice
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Arizona Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|