Michigan: Car owner who left Jeep at dealership gets sued after worker dies during oil change

[GameOver]

I don't really understand what happened. What does "jump" mean in this scenario? At first glance it sounds like an error by the first mechanic who started the jeep.



Is that not why you bring it to the mechanic? It's like saying "Next time, before you go to the doctor, make sure you're not sick"

Click to shrink...

It's common practice to leave parked cars in gear for extra safety measure. I leave my car in gear all the time. If on a incline I leave it on 1st and if on downhill I leave it on reverse. It like having a second parking brake.

To start a manual car you have to push the clutch and if release it while the car is on gear it will lunch forward before stalling out.

 

[Vyse]

The plaintiff would still have to prove the owner l was negligent in leaving the car. It's not enough that someone was injured with his property alone.

Click to shrink...

Does leaving the keys, without questioning the skill sets of those who will have access to the car, count as negligence?

 

[Cat Party]

There are lots of ways to get around worker's comp. I don't know if this is a valid strategy or not, but it is certainly scummy.

Just because the dealership has to indemnify the car owner does not mean that the car owner isn't suffering from this, BTW. The car owner is literally blameless in this but now they have their name appearing in the public record as a defendant in a wrongful death case. That's pretty fucked up.

 

[Parthenios]

Does leaving the keys, without questioning the skill sets of those who will have access to the car, count as negligence?

Click to shrink...

That would be a question for a jury but I imagine that's a tough sell. Most jurors would likely conclude that it's reasonable to assume the staff at a dealership was properly trained. Otherwise the expectation would be that customers need to essentially conduct background checks and hiring interviews for staff of services they're hiring.

 

[Vyse]

That would be a question for a jury but I imagine that's a tough sell. Most jurors would likely conclude that it's reasonable to assume the staff at a dealership was properly trained. Otherwise the expectation would be that customers need to essentially conduct background checks and hiring interviews for staff of services they're hiring.

Click to shrink...

My mind believes a jury would think blaming the owner is crazy talk but now I'm wondering if this is just something where the law gets the final say and anyone is open to a sure thing lawsuit if a valet driver runs over someone.

 

[Achtung]

Oh, that law I do understand and it seems like it would make sense. I meant the law they talk about before, where they say they cant sue the boss because there is a law preventing that.

Click to shrink...

Ok got ya and you are right... I can not in any way explain that one.

 

[Sparkedglory2]

You can't sue "the boss" for negligence because the law says so? What the hell kind of backwards logic is that? Hope this gets thrown out.

 

[Speedstersonic]

Wait i still don't understand why they can't sue the company, not the boss. It's a company fault, if the boss owns the company still should be sued to the company shouldn't it?

 

[Kastanjemanden]

Fuck Jeeps. Killed Anton Yelchin.

 

[Tavernade]

You can't sue "the boss" for negligence because the law says so? What the hell kind of backwards logic is that? Hope this gets thrown out.

Click to shrink...

Kinda feel like the actual solution to this whole thing would be to overturn that law and then sue the boss. Do one of those 'how is this law still on the books' thing and sing it from the rooftops until the state fixes it.

 

[Astral]

What a bullshit law

Click to shrink...

This is so fucking wild to me. I feel like it shouldn't be applicable in this or any similar situation because you're obviously handing your vehicle over under the assumption that this person is qualified, whether it's valet or maintenance.

 

[Andrew J]

Kinda feel like the actual solution to this whole thing would be to overturn that law and then sue the boss. Do one of those 'how is this law still on the books' thing and sing it from the rooftops until the state fixes it.

Click to shrink...

This is how every workers' compensation system in the United States has functioned for over a century. It's not going to change.

 

[Jarsonot]

That would be a question for a jury but I imagine that's a tough sell. Most jurors would likely conclude that it's reasonable to assume the staff at a dealership was properly trained. Otherwise the expectation would be that customers need to essentially conduct background checks and hiring interviews for staff of services they're hiring.

Click to shrink...

This is what gets me. Are they suggesting that before I give a repair shop keys to my car I need to personally verify that all employees have the ability and legal right to drive it?

And what if the shop hires someone the day after I drop my keys off, am I still responsible in that scenario?

Either way it's absurd. Are there legal grounds for how I personally verify the ability to drive? What if my criteria are different from someone else's? Is there a road test and written test?

Ridiculous.

 

[Tavernade]

This is how every workers' compensation system in the United States has functioned for over a century. It's not going to change.

Click to shrink...

Then there should probably be something preventing people being hired to jobs that require a motor vehicle licenses who do not actually have a motor vehicle license which seems like how could that not be a thing.

 

[CerealKi11a]

This sounds like a great ploy for attorney David Femminineo to drum up some free press.

Click to shrink...

I look forward to more advertisements on his ill-gotten gains every Fall. Ridiculous.

 

[Radd Redd]

That should be thrown out. I shouldn't be responsible for a mechanic fucking up when I'm not around or moving my car.

 

[Keldroc]

So if you park your car on the side of the road and someone goes to break into it, cuts their arm on the glass and bleeds out, can you sue the car owner?

Click to shrink...

You can sue anyone for any reason in the United States. The only question is whether you win or not.

This is probably something that has to happen to satisfy stupid insurance regulations, like when that aunt sued her nephew and got roasted in the press even though there was no alternative and she wasn't actually trying to win a punitive suit against her nephew. It just had to happen because of the insurance company.

 

[jeelybeans]

Just curious. Do gun laws have this "vicarious liability" clause in them for gun owners?

Click to shrink...

I'd totally be okay with this.

Edit: and letting workers and their families sue their bosses in the event of a death at work where negligence was involved.

 

[kmfdmpig]

That's ridiculous enough to annoy me. The owner didn't do anything wrong. Throw this shit out of court.

 

[Psittacus]

It's clear, based on that threadmark, there's legal precedent to make this case.

I would be SHOCKED, however, if a judge/jury actually found the owner in any way responsible for this.

Click to shrink...

I don't know about the US but here I'd just assume that the court would rule that a reasonable person would assume that car mechanics are licensed and trained to safely handle a vehicle.

 

[ThatCrazyGuy]

Wtf is this insane loophole.

So if I ever drop off my car at the dealership, can I drop my keys into a folder/box and not actually hand it to a person who might drive?

Usually, I hand my keys to the service rep, not the actual mechanic. Come to think of it, I usually keep the keys in the ignition as they check the mileage and the service guys takes them out and walks away. I never actually hand him the keys.

 

[Pajama]

Just completely nuts

 

[sejny]

It's either negligent entrustment, or it's not.

"Negligent entrustment is a cause of action in United States tort law which arises where one party ("the entrustor") is held liable for negligence because they negligently provided another party ("the entrustee") with a dangerous instrumentality, and the entrusted party caused injury to a third party with that instrumentality. The cause of action most frequently arises where one person allows another to drive their automobile."

 

[kIdMuScLe]

It would mean the car launches forward. The kid probably had his foot on the gas if he didn't realize the car had a clutch and when he disengaged it, the car launched forward.

Click to shrink...

No, what probably happened is that whoever parked it left it in gear and never bother to tell anyone about it. So when you start the car and let go of the clutch the car jumps forward. Is a really stupid habit because are usually flat and you only park it in gear is if in your on a steep hill.

I hate it that shit when the mechanic would bring my car and park it in gear. Is like is only gonna take me 5 seconds to get into the car my friend why you gotta do that?! We ain't in no hills buddy

 

[TAJ]

No, what probably happened is that whoever parked it left it in gear and never bother to tell anyone about it. So when you start the car and let go of the clutch the car jumps forward. Is a really stupid habit because are usually flat and you only park it in gear is if in your on a steep hill.

I hate it that shit when the mechanic would bring my car and park it in gear. Is like is only gonna take me 5 seconds to get into the car my friend why you gotta do that?! We ain't in no hills buddy

Click to shrink...

I always park my car in gear and I haven't stalled at/near startup in thirty years of driving, not even while learning. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[eyeball_kid]

I always park my car in gear and I haven't stalled at/near startup in thirty years of driving, not even while learning. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Click to shrink...

The mechanic who was "driving" was a 19 year-old. I would be suprised if more than a couple percent of people their age know how to drive a stick in the U.S. It's hard to even find a new manual car to buy these days. If they were surprised that the car jumped when they released the clutch then uh...it shows a pretty basic lack of understanding and experience because they didn't check to see if it was in gear first. That's like stickshift 101.

 

[Deleted member 23046]

Beside the legal case, a reminder that there's like ≈ 5000 workers who dies every year in the USA. The rate is rather high on the international scale. That's a thing to keep in mind when rich conservatives praise blue collars but not their working conditions.

 

[S1lentSymph0ny]

No, what probably happened is that whoever parked it left it in gear and never bother to tell anyone about it. So when you start the car and let go of the clutch the car jumps forward. Is a really stupid habit because are usually flat and you only park it in gear is if in your on a steep hill.

I hate it that shit when the mechanic would bring my car and park it in gear. Is like is only gonna take me 5 seconds to get into the car my friend why you gotta do that?! We ain't in no hills buddy

Click to shrink...

What a ridiculous thing to complain about.

If you drive stick and are aware of what you're doing you will always make sure to put the car back in neutral if you want to release the clutch and not go anywhere. Nobody should have to tell you they left your car in gear. You should check the stick and verify that it is not.

 

[ChrisJSY]

What a ridiculous thing to complain about.

If you drive stick and are aware of what you're doing you will always make sure to put the car back in neutral if you want to release the clutch and not go anywhere. Nobody should have to tell you they left your car in gear. You should check the stick and verify that it is not.

Click to shrink...

Yup, I always park my car in gear out of habit and safety.
Also some cars you need to push the clutch for it to even start (09 Mustangs for example).

Always seeing people who don't, in car parks where they assume it's level (I assume it would be as well in a multi-story) but see their vehicles unoccupied and has rolled out of the parking spot. Don't need much gradient for a vehicle to start rolling.

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

No, what probably happened is that whoever parked it left it in gear and never bother to tell anyone about it. So when you start the car and let go of the clutch the car jumps forward. Is a really stupid habit because are usually flat and you only park it in gear is if in your on a steep hill.

I hate it that shit when the mechanic would bring my car and park it in gear. Is like is only gonna take me 5 seconds to get into the car my friend why you gotta do that?! We ain't in no hills buddy

Click to shrink...

What is wrong with you if you're letting the clutch out without knowing if you're in neutral or not

That's on you

 

[Catilio]

wow.

a law that protects and employer even when they were negligent. That's so wrong in so many levels

 

[Orbis]

EDIT: Ok, not the family's fault necessarily

 

[JimD]

A lot of people blaming the plaintiff attorney here when all he's doing is properly advocating for his client. Blame the laws, not the lawyer.

I'm a former claims adjuster who's dealt with both employer liability claims and vehicle fatality claims. Employer liability is what covers cases like this, when Workers Comp is limited in the restitution it can make to the victims family, and there's clear negligence on behalf of the employer (in hiring someone who wasnt capable of doing the job safely and didn't have a license). Sadly, in many states employer liability is extremely limited. I don't know the statute in Michigan off hand, but it wouldn't surprise me if it left the employee no recourse in suing the boss.

Now as far as the vehicle owner is concerned, keep in mind that when suits are filed like this, generally speaking anyone who may have contributed to the negligence is involved as well as as any party whose insurance coverage might be triggered. Car insurance is tied to the *vehicle* not the *driver*, so that coverage is triggered regardless of who was behind the wheel. HOWEVER, as others have pointed out, that insurer will immediately seek indemnification from the business to which the owner passed over care, custody, and control of his vehicle. This happens all the time in suits like this. It's extremely common. I don't know about the particulars of that indemnity, but it seems like it would be fairly cut and dried.

 

[JimD]

What a vile family, hopefully they get absolutely nothing and end up on the streets through legal bills.

Click to shrink...

Family did absolutely nothing wrong here, neither did their attorney. Take a couple minutes to read the additional articles before dropping the hot take.

 

[Coolluck]

Kinda feel like the actual solution to this whole thing would be to overturn that law and then sue the boss. Do one of those 'how is this law still on the books' thing and sing it from the rooftops until the state fixes it.

Click to shrink...

I think that'd be an ex post facto law. The law as it stands needs revision for sure.

 

[MinusTydus]

According to Langton, it would be the same if you took your car to a restaurant with a valet and you handed the keys over. Under state law, if the valet driver injures someone with your car, you are responsible.

Click to shrink...

That's ridiculous.

So if you want to become a murderer, get a job as a valet and you can just start running over people and be like, "Not my car, not my problem"?

No, Lionel Hutz, that's not how it works.

 

[DarrenM]

This is an insane law/lawsuit.

In my experience in Europe, if you take your car to a dealership and they damage your car, another vehicle, property or cause injury/death, then the dealership is liable for everything.

I left my car with a dealership to have some work done. My car was modified. It sat pretty low and had non OEM body work. They subsequently damaged my car and but paid for all repairs, zero push back or questions, because the damage was caused while in their care.

My sister also left her car at a different dealership, the car was incorrectly secured and raised on a car lift. The car fell off, landed upside down and on to it's roof. The dealer is liable for not having qualified staff. They did say the technician was new but still replaced the car.

If that falling car had killed someone, the dealer would be getting sued/facing prosecution, not the vehicle owner. It's crazy to me that this is a real thing. The second you had the keys over to the dealership, the vehicle is in their care. Your car would be under the dealership's insurance at that stage. The same way any courtesy/loaner car they give you, would be in your care, most likely under your insurance and you would be liable for any damage.

 

[Orbis]

Family did absolutely nothing wrong here, neither did their attorney. Take a couple minutes to read the additional articles before dropping the hot take.

Click to shrink...

Ok I get the family maybe aren't to blame but then why can't the attorney just, not sue? I'm trying to find the actual wording of the law that says someone has to be sued.

 

[LTWheels]

As an Injury lawyer in UK, I'm flabbergasted at the law over not being able to sue your employer for negligence.

 

[Arttemis]

Probably a loophole no one was expecting?

Click to shrink...

It sounds like it's Michigan law working as intended. Making bosses immune to liability when negligent because they're the fucking boss. Disgusting.

 

[Rodney McKay]

You don't HAVE to sue people. Yes it's a stupid law, but it's also stupid to take advantage of a stupid law to punish someone who isn't responsible.

Yes I get that the guy who died had a family, but it shouldn't be an innocent car owners responsibility to pay for their expenses, even if there's a stupid legal loophole about it, and it's still a mess up thing to do.

 

[Thrill_house]

Holy shit! Never work/live in Michigan is my main takeaway from this. I couldn't imagine not being able to sue my boss for negligence

 

[Truly Gargantuan]

I'm glad this indemnity law exists in this case and that the Jeep owner was able to win.
But this means the owner still has to defend themselves in court, and their defense lawyer will still try to win the case. Yet I imagine the owner won't want to win the case (I wouldn't, I would WANT to lose so the dealership would have to pay), so the goal of the owner and their defense lawyer are at odds.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

I might be especially dense, but I dont get the reasoning for this:

That doesnt make sense, why wouldnt you sue your boss if he has been negligent and is the reason for your injury?

Click to shrink...

Sounds like the kind of anti-labor law that a capitalist would write so they can offer dangerous working conditions without any kind of restrictions. Prove me wrong, legal-ERA.

 

[excelsiorlef]

That's ridiculous.

So if you want to become a murderer, get a job as a valet and you can just start running over people and be like, "Not my car, not my problem"?

No, Lionel Hutz, that's not how it works.

Click to shrink...

I mean you'd also go to jail too

 

[ngower]

As an Injury lawyer in UK, I'm flabbergasted at the law over not being able to sue your employer for negligence.

Click to shrink...

Detroit was/kinda is the hub of automobile manufacturing in the US for years. Detroit in general was a huge industrial city for much of America's brief history. The stupidity of our country is that states are mini-countries legislatively, so it's entirely plausible that the auto lobby used their leverage as an economic hub of Michigan to get these laws on the books.

 

[Necromanti]

Yet another day of being completely baffled by the American legal system.

 

[Vidiot]

You should honestly get into some kind of legal trouble for dumb ass fucking lawsuits like this. I feel for the families loss but come on now.

 

[Dyle]

Michigan's turn to be the laughingstock state I suppose despite the fact they're supposed to be the car experts

 

[Necromanti]

"When you hand your car over to anybody including the valet or the person at the service desk at your local dealership, you better be able to trust that person," the attorney said.

Click to shrink...

If a car dealership can't be trusted to safely operate vehicles, then they should not legally be allowed to sell or service them to begin with. Libertarian nonsense.

The mechanic who was "driving" was a 19 year-old. I would be suprised if more than a couple percent of people their age know how to drive a stick in the U.S. It's hard to even find a new manual car to buy these days. If they were surprised that the car jumped when they released the clutch then uh...it shows a pretty basic lack of understanding and experience because they didn't check to see if it was in gear first. That's like stickshift 101.

Click to shrink...

The 19-year-old didn't have a driver's license, anyway.