$914,300 Jury Verdict In Suit Alleging Defective Bus Door

On February 20, 1995, a 38 year-old bus driver was injured to an overhead sign swung down and struck her on the head while she was driving the bus. The door was approximately 4’ wide, and 1.5’ high and was hinged at the bottom.

Suit was brought against General Motors, which manufactured the RTS-II bus. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant failed to warn of the condition and failed to instruct users of the bus on how to properly secure the door.

The defendant argues that the overhead sign compartment door had been altered by the plaintiff’s employer (SEPTA) which removed a safety cable which would have prevented the accident. The defense also disputed the extent of the injury sustained by the plaintiff as a result of the incident.
General Motors sold the 1980 RTS-II bus to SEPTA in 1990. The plaintiff was employed as a bus driver for SEPTA. Evidence showed that when the bus was originally made by the defendant, it included a safety cable to prevent the sign compartment door from swinging down. This cable had been removed by the plaintiff’s employer prior to the accident. The plaintiff’s safety engineer testified that it was foreseeable that the safety cable would be removed. This expert opined that the door was defective in that the hinges were located on the bottom and that there was a lack of warnings that the door could swing open and a lack of instructions regarding how to properly secure the door.

The defendant’s mechanical engineer testified that it was better to put the hinges on the bottom of the door for ease of maintenance and that they could not be placed at top, in any event, because of the contour of the roof. This expert opined that there was no need for warnings because the safety cable originally installed on the overhead sign compartment door prevented the door from swinging down. The defendant contended that the accident was caused by improper maintenance on the part of the plaintiff’s employer (SEPTA). Evidence showed that in 1984, the defendant sent out a Service Information Bulletin recommending certain changes to the sign compartment door, including that the interior latching mechanism be bent to hold the door closed more securely. The defendant also sent out chains and hooks to be attached to the middle of the door. The defendant argued that the plaintiff’s employer failed to follow those recommendations. The plaintiff contended that the Service information Bulletin was inadequate because it did not include a warning despite the fact that the defendant knew there was a safety problem with the door.

Injury: Four herniated discs in the cervical spine; thoracic outlet syndrome.
Medical expenses were approximately $50,000. Plaintiff sought to recover past and future wage loss until age 65.

Result: $914,300 jury verdict.

Plaintiff’s Expert Witness: Manuel Raefsky, safety engineer, Consulting Engineers, Malvern, PA.
Defendant’s Expert Witness: Bruce Bowman, mechanical engineer, Detroit, MI.
Plaintiff’s Attorney: Michael J. Olley of Coffey & Kaye, Bala Cynwyd, PA.
Defendant’s Attorney: Francis Grey, Jr. of Lavin, Coleman, Finnarrelli and Grey, Philadelphia, PA.
Stone v. General Motors Corp., No. 96-4153 (E.D. PA Sep. 28, 1998)

BACK