18 F. Supp. 3d 1361
S.D. Fla.2014Background
- Fire in Key Largo, Florida in 2008 destroyed plaintiffs' home; the 2000 Ford Expedition under plaintiffs' home at fire start time.
- Expedition had recall context: TI speed control deactivation switch (05S28) removed in May 2005, prior to the fire.
- Plaintiffs allege defect in the TI SCDS caused the fire; expert Kerr contends fire cause undetermined.
- Experts disagree on defect existence; all agree the fire cause is undetermined; one expert mistakenly assumed TI SCDS installed at time of fire.
- Case was remanded from MDL-1718 and later transferred to the Southern District of Florida for case-specific discovery; Ford moves for final/partial summary judgment.
- Court grants Ford’s summary judgment, finding no admissible defect proof or causation sufficient to sustain strict liability or negligence claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs prove a defect in the Expedition | O'Bryans contend defect existed (TI SCDS) | No admissible defect evidence; TI SCDS removed long before fire | Defendant granted summary judgment; lack of defect proof |
| Whether Cassisi inference applies to infer defect from accident | Cassisi inference supports defect from malfunction during normal operation | Cassisi not applicable; burden not shifted; no malfunction proved | Cassisi inference rejected; cannot survive summary judgment |
| Whether plaintiffs prove causation of the fire by a defective product | Defect caused fire; circumstantial evidence via expert | Cause undetermined; no admissible evidence of defect or malfunction | No causation proven; defendant entitled to summary judgment |
| Whether plaintiffs can rely on expert Kerr given qualifications | Kerr credible on fire cause/origin | Kerr not qualified to opine on defect or malfunction | Kerr's testimony insufficient to prove defect; admissibility issue favorable to Ford |
| Whether alternative explanations for the fire defeat defect-based claims | Dismissal of alternative causes unnecessary | Alternative causes negate defect proof | Evidence insufficient; defect not proven; summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Rink v. Cheminova, Inc., 400 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2005) (requires admissible evidence of defect to prove causation in products cases)
- West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So.2d 80 (Fla. 1976) (five elements in strict products liability; defect proof required)
- Cassisi v. Maytag Co., 396 So.2d 1140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (Cassisi inference where malfunction during normal operation may raise presumption of defect)
- Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 406 A.2d 1254 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1979) (malfunction evidence can support inference of defect)
- McCann v. Atlas Supply Co., 325 F.Supp. 701 (W.D. Pa. 1971) (circumstantial accident evidence can support defect proof in some cases)
- MacDougall v. Ford Motor Co., 214 Pa.Super. 384 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1969) (proof of malfunction can render product unfit; not always require specific defect)