I tell folks that theu are free to sue me for all I have, it won't take long!
It's no accident Chavy got sued, and not, say, Joe's body shop or Yugo Motors. Simply put: the lawyer saw a chance of making money with little work.
Safety is not a simple matter of installing the latest gee-gaw. Nor have we any obligation to do more than what is required, or agreed to. Hindsight is always 20/20.
Is there a lawyer problem? Perhaps. When McDonalds is getting sued for having coffee both too hot, and not hot enough .... it's amazing anyone sells coffee anymore!
Few things as 'safety' are as fraught with unintended consequences. A good example is a product called "saw stop." The inventor saw a need to reduce table saw injuries, with the intent of licensing it to saw makers. His money expectations were never an issue; rather, every maker had the idea nixed by the legal department, often using reasoning like what was seen in the above example.
That is, the company was legally 'safer' if they did not offer or use the invention.
A true believer, the inventor is now in the saw manufacturing business. He has yet to receive permission to make retro-fit kits from other manufacturers. So - as so well demonstrated a few months back by a neighbor - fingers continue to be lost, and hands mangled.
