spectr17
01-23-2003, 01:48 PM
Decision on prop fatality could make big waves
By TIM RENKEN, St. Louis Post-Dispatch
01/18/2003
In the summer of 1995, Chicagoans Rex and Jeanne Sprietsma were water skiing with friends on a lake in Tennessee. Jeanne had been riding in the bow of the tow boat when she fell out. The boat ran over her. The propeller chopped into her arm and head, killing her.
Last month the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in that case, and the name Sprietsma has become shorthand for an issue that could change American boats and boating.
After the accident, Rex Sprietsma sued Mercury, claiming that the outboard was dangerous because it had no guard to keep objects or people from contact with the whirling blades. The case went through lower courts, with Mercury winning in each.
This issue of prop guards has a long legal history. The two important factors in such cases are that the Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971 preempts state law in boating standards and that the U.S. Coast Guard, which sets federal boating safety standards, has rejected mandatory prop guards. The Coast Guard says they are ineffective, reduce efficiency, pose maintenance problems, affect steering and can aggravate injuries by trapping the victims.
The Sprietsma case reached the Illinois Supreme Court, which ruled as lower courts did, that Mercury wasn't negligent because its motors met federal safety standards.
A state supreme court decision usually ends such cases, especially when it agrees with lower courts. But Sprietsma, a marketing consultant from Downers Grove, Ill., and his legal team persisted, taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The court had been expected to rule early this year and almost all observers believed that a decision against Sprietsma was inevitable. But in early December the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Sprietsma should get to present his case to a jury in state court.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the federal law does not prevent unlawful death lawsuits in state courts because those lawsuits can serve the federal boating act's more prominent objective, promoting boating safety.
The decision does nothing more than give Sprietsma a go-ahead to pursue his case. But whether he wins or loses, the effects on the boating industry are profound. Monita W. Fontaine, the National Marine Manufacturers Association's vice president of government relations, said that the loss of federal preemption would "lead to a patchwork of inconsistent regulations in multiple jurisdictions, with safety standards being set by juries rather than safety experts."
Tom Mielke, corporate communications director for Mercury Marine, observed that the reason prop guards are not required by the Federal Boat Safety Act is that there is evidence the guards negatively impact steering and can inflict worse injuries than a standard propeller.
"Nine federal courts and many state courts have found the decision to be preempted by the decision of the Coast Guard" that propeller guards are dangerous, he said.
Few boats on the water today have propeller guards. That means all manufacturers are now open to lawsuits. And these suits can stem from any boating accident, not just propeller accidents. And not just manufacturers are at risk. Boat dealers could be sued for selling "defective" products, with verdicts being rendered by jurors who may not know anything about boats.
The big winner in this case thus far, of course, are the personal injury lawyers, who can get trials and settlements for "defective" products no matter what the experts in the Coast Guard think.
Reporter Tim Renken
E-mail: trenken@post-dispatch.com
Phone: 314-849-4239
===============
http://www.propguard.net/how.html
http://www.floridaconservation.org/psm/pro...rop/propgu2.jpg (http://www.floridaconservation.org/psm/prop/propgu2.jpg)
================
What is a propeller guard? Two patented aftermarket devices look like this, a cowling and a cage. The maker of the cowling device, Prop Guard, Inc., of Westcliffe, Colo., claims that it prevents propeller injuries, increases power and improves handling, but most experts are skeptical. Another kind of device is an infrared detector that stops the prop when it senses an object. But it works only when the boat is stationary.
By TIM RENKEN, St. Louis Post-Dispatch
01/18/2003
In the summer of 1995, Chicagoans Rex and Jeanne Sprietsma were water skiing with friends on a lake in Tennessee. Jeanne had been riding in the bow of the tow boat when she fell out. The boat ran over her. The propeller chopped into her arm and head, killing her.
Last month the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in that case, and the name Sprietsma has become shorthand for an issue that could change American boats and boating.
After the accident, Rex Sprietsma sued Mercury, claiming that the outboard was dangerous because it had no guard to keep objects or people from contact with the whirling blades. The case went through lower courts, with Mercury winning in each.
This issue of prop guards has a long legal history. The two important factors in such cases are that the Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971 preempts state law in boating standards and that the U.S. Coast Guard, which sets federal boating safety standards, has rejected mandatory prop guards. The Coast Guard says they are ineffective, reduce efficiency, pose maintenance problems, affect steering and can aggravate injuries by trapping the victims.
The Sprietsma case reached the Illinois Supreme Court, which ruled as lower courts did, that Mercury wasn't negligent because its motors met federal safety standards.
A state supreme court decision usually ends such cases, especially when it agrees with lower courts. But Sprietsma, a marketing consultant from Downers Grove, Ill., and his legal team persisted, taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The court had been expected to rule early this year and almost all observers believed that a decision against Sprietsma was inevitable. But in early December the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Sprietsma should get to present his case to a jury in state court.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the federal law does not prevent unlawful death lawsuits in state courts because those lawsuits can serve the federal boating act's more prominent objective, promoting boating safety.
The decision does nothing more than give Sprietsma a go-ahead to pursue his case. But whether he wins or loses, the effects on the boating industry are profound. Monita W. Fontaine, the National Marine Manufacturers Association's vice president of government relations, said that the loss of federal preemption would "lead to a patchwork of inconsistent regulations in multiple jurisdictions, with safety standards being set by juries rather than safety experts."
Tom Mielke, corporate communications director for Mercury Marine, observed that the reason prop guards are not required by the Federal Boat Safety Act is that there is evidence the guards negatively impact steering and can inflict worse injuries than a standard propeller.
"Nine federal courts and many state courts have found the decision to be preempted by the decision of the Coast Guard" that propeller guards are dangerous, he said.
Few boats on the water today have propeller guards. That means all manufacturers are now open to lawsuits. And these suits can stem from any boating accident, not just propeller accidents. And not just manufacturers are at risk. Boat dealers could be sued for selling "defective" products, with verdicts being rendered by jurors who may not know anything about boats.
The big winner in this case thus far, of course, are the personal injury lawyers, who can get trials and settlements for "defective" products no matter what the experts in the Coast Guard think.
Reporter Tim Renken
E-mail: trenken@post-dispatch.com
Phone: 314-849-4239
===============
http://www.propguard.net/how.html
http://www.floridaconservation.org/psm/pro...rop/propgu2.jpg (http://www.floridaconservation.org/psm/prop/propgu2.jpg)
================
What is a propeller guard? Two patented aftermarket devices look like this, a cowling and a cage. The maker of the cowling device, Prop Guard, Inc., of Westcliffe, Colo., claims that it prevents propeller injuries, increases power and improves handling, but most experts are skeptical. Another kind of device is an infrared detector that stops the prop when it senses an object. But it works only when the boat is stationary.