Successes

Product Liability Trials

Since entering private practice in 1996, Robert Hanlon, Jr. has served as lead trial counsel in more than twenty civil cases in nine states.  They include:

  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – ROOF DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this crashworthiness case, which was first tried in the fall of 2001 in Hudson County, New Jersey.  The mother of three young boys was killed when a tire came off a vehicle traveling in the opposite direction and struck and crushed the roof of her minivan.  She died instantly of a traumatic brain injury, leaving her three sons in the driverless van traveling at highway speeds.  The van scraped along the center divider and came to rest without further incident.  The decedent’s sons and husband, a firefighter, brought suit against the manufacturer of the minivan.  They sought $1.5 million in wrongful death damages and unspecified damages for severe emotional distress suffered by the boys.  After a three week trial, a jury found the minivan roof to be defective and awarded the family $5 million in wrongful death damages and $15 million in severe emotional distress damages.  The trial court set aside the $20 million award and ordered a new trial as to damages only.  The case was retried in September 2002.  The jury was informed that the minivan’s roof was defective and a proximate cause of the decedent’s death.  The jury awarded $800,000 in wrongful death damages and $25,000 in severe emotional distress damages.  The case settled on appeal.
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – SEAT BELT DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this restraint system design defect case, which was partially tried in the summer of 2002 in Camden County, New Jersey.  Plaintiffs alleged that the seat belts in the subject minivan failed during a frontal collision.  The matter resolved after several in limine motions were decided in defendants' favor and after a pretrial Rule 104 hearing resulted in the exclusion of sled tests offered into evidence by plaintiff.
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – SUDDEN ACCELERATION:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this sudden acceleration case, which was tried in March 2003 in Cobb County, Georgia.  The single vehicle accident occurred on Christmas Eve.  Plaintiff, a young woman, alleged that a design defect in the cruise control system caused her SUV to accelerate out of control and into a tree.  Plaintiff was flown from the scene to a hospital where she underwent emergency surgery for a ruptured spleen.  The jury returned a no cause of action verdict following a two-week trial.  Plaintiff’s appeal was denied.
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – SEAT DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this seat design case, which was tried in February and March 2004 in Mercer County, New Jersey.  Plaintiff, an attorney, sustained multiple injuries, the most significant of which was a debilitating closed head injury.  The case presented a significant risk not only due to the nature and extent of the injuries, but also because the manufacturer had been found liable in several similar cases and in some of them had been found liable for punitive damages.  After a four week trial, the court dismissed plaintiff’s punitive damages claim.  The jury found that the seat was defective and a 60% cause of plaintiff’s injuries.  The jury awarded $1.3 million in compensatory damages against the manufacturer.  Plaintiff’s appeal challenging the sufficiency of the award was denied.
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – SUDDEN ACCELERATION:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this sudden acceleration case, which was tried in September 2004 in Cobb County, Georgia.  The court directed a verdict in defendant's favor at the close of plaintiff’s case.
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – TRANSMISSION DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this “false park” case, which was partially tried in September 2004 in Essex County, New Jersey.  Plaintiffs alleged that the transmission, which was the subject of a recall, slipped from Park into Reverse.  The mother of two young children, one with special needs, was killed in the accident.  The case settled during trial.
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – SUDDEN ACCELERATION:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this sudden acceleration case, which was tried over nine weeks commencing in January 2005 in Cook County, Illinois.  A doctor was struck and killed by the subject as SUV while crossing the street in front of his hospital.  Pursuant to a partial settlement agreement, the jury was asked only to allocate fault between the driver and the vehicle.  The jury assigned two-thirds fault to the driver. 
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – TRANSMISSION DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this rollaway case, which was tried in January 2006 in federal court in Iowa.  A two year old boy shifted a running pick-up truck from Park into Reverse.  His grandfather was killed trying to re-enter the truck.  Plaintiffs  alleged that the 2001 model year truck was defectively designed because it lacked a brake-shift interlock, which would have prevented the child from shifting the vehicle out of Park because his foot was not on the brake pedal.  Other manufacturers had incorporated that device into their vehicles by the mid-1990’s.  The jury returned a no cause of action verdict.  Plaintiff’s appeal was denied.
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – TRANSMISSION DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this “false park” case, which was tried over six weeks commencing in January 2007 in Los Angeles, California. A 38-year-old father of three was killed while attempting to re-enter his vehicle after the transmission allegedly slipped from Park into Reverse. The vehicle was the subject of a “false park” recall, as were three other vehicles with the same allegedly defective component.  The jury returned a plaintiff’s verdict and awarded $5 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitive damages.  The case settled on appeal. 
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – TRANSMISSION DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this “false park” case, which was tried in September 2007 in Bethesda, Maryland.  A young mother was killed in her driveway when her minivan allegedly slipped from Park into Reverse.  The allegations were similar to those presented in Mraz v. Chrysler (discussed above) except that this vehicle was not the subject of a recall.  The jury returned a no cause of action verdict. 
  • AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCT LIABILITY – CRASHWORTHINESS:  Mr. Hanlon represented an automobile manufacturer in this crashworthiness case, which was tried in April 2008 in Camden County, New Jersey.  Plaintiff alleged that he sustained debilitating brain injuries due to design defects in the vehicle’s airbag system and sun visor.  The jury returned a no cause of action verdict after a three week trial.
  • PRODUCT LIABILITY – FAN DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon second chaired the October 2009 trial of this product liability action venued in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania.  Plaintiffs alleged that a 7 year old boy died in an apartment fire caused by a recalled fan manufactured by Mr. Hanlon’s client.  The jury returned a plaintiffs’ verdict in the amount of $13.5 million. 
  • PRODUCT LIABILITY – INDUSTRIAL RACKING DESIGN:  Mr. Hanlon represented the manufacturer of a commercial racking system in the limited retrial of this product liability action, which was conducted in February 2010 in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania.  The case stemmed from an industrial accident that occurred in September 2001.  The plaintiff was operating a lift truck in a warehouse when commercial racking collapsed, dumping 2,000 pounds of product on him.  Plaintiff, a 31 year old male,  suffered lumbar burst fractures and a traumatic cauda equina injury that left him wheelchair bound due to partial paralysis of his lower legs and feet.  He also suffered neurological damage affecting his bowel and bladder functions.  The case was originally tried to a plaintiff’s verdict in 2006.  An appeal resulted in a partial retrial limited to damages.  Mr. Hanlon served as lead trial counsel in the second trial.  The jury returned a verdict of $12.4 million.  Defendant’s appeal is pending.