Defective air bag responsible for child's death, jury says.

A federal jury has found Chrysler partly liable for the death of a five-year-old, finding that the boy was killed by a defectively designed air bag that deployed in a low-speed collision. The decision marks the first time a case involving a child's death from an air bag reached a jury decision.

The boy, Michael Crespo, was sitting in the front passenger seat of a 1995 Dodge Caravan minivan when it crashed into an oncoming vehicle in August 1995. The family was in Puerto Rico on vacation, said their attorney, Gary Douglas of Finz and Finz in New York City.

Crespo's father, Jose Liz, was driving the van on the right side of a two-lane driveway. The left side of the driveway was in disrepair. Liz, Crespo, and two of Crespo's cousins, who were seated in the back, were returning to Crespo's grandmother's house at the bottom of the steeply graded drive. As the van descended, a neighbor driving up the hill collided with the minivan.

The jurors determined Chrysler was 50 percent liable for the child's death because the defendant's air bag was "unreasonably dangerous" and caused injury to Crespo, according to the verdict form. The remaining 50 percent of liability was unassigned. (Crespo v. Chrysler Corp., No. 97-Civ.-8246 (JSR) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 4, 1998).)

Crespo's parents sought compensatory and punitive damages. They asserted Chrysler was liable because it designed a defective air bag and because its warning labels failed to convey the hazards a deploying air bag poses to children.

The design defect allegation was based on the "second collision" theory: that it was not the accident but the defective air bag that "made the accident victim's injuries ... more severe than what they would have been had the car been properly designed," Judge Jed Rakoff said in denying Chrysler's request for summary judgment.

Under New York law, the judge said, a manufacturer may be liable for failure to warn a consumer of avoidable risks if the failure is the proximate cause of a plaintiff's injury, if the manufacturer has reason to know the product is likely to be dangerous for its intended use, if the manufacturer has no reason to believe the user will realize the danger, and if the manufacturer fails to exercise reasonable care to inform the user of the danger. Evidence at trial revealed Chrysler knew for decades about the likelihood that its air bags would result in child fatalities, Douglas said.

Despite Rakoff's ruling for the plaintiffs on summary judgment, the judge dismissed the failure-to-warn claim during trial, stating Chrysler had complied with minimum federal requirements. Rakoff also dismissed Liz's injury claim and the suit's punitive damages claims.

Crespo's mother, as administrator of the boy's estate, will receive the monetary award for the minute of suffering her son sustained before his death, Douglas said.

Chrysler says the jury's decision defies logic because the company followed the federal guidelines governing the installation and deployment of air bags.

"It's tragic because you're dealing with the death of a five-year-old boy. There is nothing Chrysler or any other auto manufacturer could have done to prevent his death," said Jay Cooney, spokesperson for DaimlerChrysler. "It was unfortunate that the jury appeared to allow their emotions to cloud their judgment."

"There was an unequivocal finding by a federal jury that the defendant's air bag was unreasonably dangerous and that it was [set] to fire at too low of a threshold," Douglas said. He plans to appeal the dismissal of the failure-to-warn claim, especially since the visor label did not mention the risks to children.

Chrysler has filed motions asking for a directed verdict, a new trial, or a reduction in the amount of the award so it is more in line with current state appeals court decisions, Cooney said. Oral arguments were held in February.