Click to change text size
Accident Injury Lawyers
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Spotlight Case
RIDER RENDERED QUADRIPLEGIC RECOVERS FOR MOUNTAIN BIKE'S DEFECTIVE BRAKING SYSTEM
Kennedy v. Wolff Cycle, Pa., Philadelphia County C.C.P., No. 3841, Mar. Term, 1993, July 15, 1997.
Kennedy, a 24-year-old college student, purchased a Raleigh Pointe mountain bike with knobby tires from Wolff Cycle. The bike was equipped with a Shimano cantilever braking system. The main brake cable for the front brake was routed over a small pulley on the handlebar stem.
One day, as Kennedy was coasting at about 5 M.P.H. on the bike, he approached a red light. When he applied the brakes, the main front brake cable allegedly fractured at the pulley mechanism, allowing the brake straddle cable-which is connected to the cantilever brake arms-to catch the knobby front tire. The bike stopped suddenly, and Kennedy was pitched over the handlebars. The bike's rear tire allegedly struck a car's front fender. Kennedy was rendered quadriplegic. His medical expenses were about $378,000.
Believing the bike, and not his handling of it, was responsible for his injuries. Kennedy contacted ATLA members Eliot Hillel Lewis and Gerald Jay Pomerantz, both of Philadelphia. They filed suit against Raleigh, alleging it was strictly liable for the bike's defective braking system. Specifically, plaintiff argued the brake cable suffered a fatigue fracture because it was not flexible enough to be safely bent to accommodate the angle change necessary for routing over the small roller pulley.
Plaintiff also sued Shimano, alleging the braking system was defective for its intended use-on a mountain bike equipped with a roller pulley. Plaintiff also alleged the plastic cantilever brake arms, which contained the brake pads and are bolted to the fork, had an improperly sized spring. Plaintiff claimed this permitted the straddle cable to reach the knobby front tire and entangle in it, stopping the front wheel motion and causing pitchover.
Suit against Wolff Cycle alleged it was strictly liable for selling a defective product.
Defendants cross-claimed against each other. Raleigh and Wolff Cycle settled before trial for $4.5 million but remained in the case.
At trial, counsel focused entirely on Shimano. Plaintiff had to prove that the braking system was defective for its intended use.
Shimano's experts agreed that the fatigue failure of the brake cable at the roller pulley caused plaintiff's injuries. Shimano contended, however, the accident was the responsibility of Raleigh and Wolff Cycle. Shimano argued its braking system became unsafe only when it was combined with the roller pulley, which the company had neither sold nor designed into the bike.
To show that Shimano knew mountain bikes with roller pulley stems were an intended use of its braking system, counsel introduced pictures and drawings in the company's product literature. Plaintiff's metallurgical expert, Craig Clauser, of Malvern, Pennsylvania, pointed out that the bikes pictured had the same size pulley as the one on the plaintiff's bike.
On cross-examination, Shimano's head of marketing agreed it was foreseeable that roller pulley routing of the main cable would be used on a mountain bikes. Through this witness, counsel introduced a Shimano bulletin that recommended three types of handlebar stems, including the roller pulley stem, for routing the cable.
When plaintiff argued that the cantilever arm defects caused the pitchover that injured him, Shimano contended that there had been no pitchover. Instead, the company asserted, the fatigue failure had caused plaintiff's bicycle to strike a car's front fender, throwing plaintiff from the bike.
To rebut this, Lewis and Pomerantz introduced testimony of the car's driver, who said she has seen the rear bicycle wheel in the air through her rear passenger window and then heard something hit the car's front bender.
Counsel also introduced Don Milberger, a bicycle expert from Orinda, California. He testified that when the main brake cable fractured, the straddle cable came down on and caught the knobby tire, causing it to stop and resulting in the pitchover.
Jon Jacobson, plaintiff's accident reconstructionist and biomechanical engineering expert from Seattle, testified that the gouge marks in the cantilever brake arms could only have been made by the straddle cable's being forcibly pulled forward after catching the knobby tire. He also testified that the biomechanics of the injury suggested it was the likely result of a pitchover.
The jury returned a verdict against all three defendants for $13.5 million. Raleigh and Wolf have moved to have the verdict declared Shimano's sole responsibility.
Counsel points out that the defective braking system involved is found on thousands of mountain bikes made and equipped by other manufactures. Thus, many riders are at risk for serious injuries.
Contact the Philadelphia personal injury attorneys at Pomerantz Perlberger & Lewis today to put over 100 years of combined experience on your side.
Call or email us today for your personal consultation.
