Hirata v. Toyota Motor Corporation
 
 

In The Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii

 

 
      Settled. (This case was a bench trial in front of Judge Gary W. B. Chang. The Court bifurcated the case as to liability and damages. The liability portion was tried January 18 through February 7, 2002. The Judge notified all parties on July 5, 2002 that he would enter judgment for plaintiffs on all of their liability counts. The case subsequently settled on July 31, 2002.)  
 
 

Robert M.N. Palmer, and William G. Petrus, The Law Offices of Robert M.N. Palmer, P.C., and Wayne K. Kekina and Bert S. Sakuda, Cronin Fried Sekiya Kekina & Fairbanks, attorneys for plaintiffs; and Kenneth Fukunaga, Fukunaga, Matayoshi, Hershey & Ching and David W. Graves, Jr., Bowman & Brooke, LLP, attorneys for defendant Toyota Motor Corporation; and Shannon Wack, Law Offices of Dean E. Ochiai, attorney for defendant Spragling.


On or about March 31, 1999, at approximately 5:55 a.m., Plaintiff Naomi Hirata was operating a 1990 Toyota Camry south on Kaonohi Street at the intersection with Moanalua Road in Honolulu, Hawaii. Plaintiff Wayne Hirata was the right front-seat passenger in the Camry. Defendant Spragling, driving her 1995 Nissan, attempted to turned right from westbound Mohanalua Road onto northbound Kaonohi Street when her vehicle struck Plaintiffs’ vehicle in the southbound left-turn lane of Kaonohi Street resulting in a deceleration velocity to the Toyota of less than 20 mph. The occupant restraint systems provided for front seat passengers of the 1990 Toyota Camry included a motorized, passive shoulder harness and a manual lap belt. Both Mr. and Ms. Hirata were properly wearing their shoulder and lap belts. Mr. Hirata received relatively minor injuries in the accident and the opposing driver was completely uninjured. Ms. Hirata, who was 5’ tall and weighted approximately 130 pounds at the time of the accident, was rendered a C4-5 quadriplegia.


Plaintiffs alleged that the restraint system in the 1990 Toyota Camry was defective and unreasonably dangerous, especially to small statured persons such as Ms. Hirata. The shoulder belt in this system naturally rested on the neck of smaller individuals greatly increasing the chances of neck injuries in frontal collisions. Toyota admitted it never sled or crash tested this restraint system with fifth percentile female test dummies. Toyota’s own fit checks showed the belt would rest on the neck of small occupants. Jaguar and other manufacturers of this type of passive restraint system had developed designs that helped remove the belt from the neck of small statured occupants. More importantly, Toyota in response to numerous customer complaints, designed a “fix” that guided the belt off the neck of smaller occupants; however, it failed to tell its customers or even its dealers of this alternative design.
 

Past medical expenses exceeded $530,540, proposed future life care plan $5,340,000, and projected lost wages $910,000.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     
 
 
   
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Back