O’Hagan Meyer’s Complete Defense Verdict for Automotive Manufacturer Affirmed

Before the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, O’Hagan Meyer partner Denean Sturino represented Nissan North America in preserving a complete defense verdict she obtained in Cook County. A unanimous three-justice panel affirmed the jury’s finding of no liability against Nissan and upheld the trial court’s ruling in Nissan’s favor on a post-sale failure-to-warn claim.

The product-liability lawsuit arose from a 2019 vehicle collision involving a pre-owned Nissan Sentra. Plaintiff alleged that a defect in the vehicle’s steering column caused the steering wheel to drop suddenly. Nissan disputed the allegations and maintained that the collision resulted from Plaintiff’s excessive driving speed and maneuvers rather than an alleged vehicle defect.

At trial, the jury found Plaintiff 90% at fault, assigned 10% of the fault to the co-defendant dealership, and assigned no liability to O’Hagan Meyer’s client, Nissan. Despite the jury’s use of the incorrect verdict form to represent its verdict, the trial judge, the Honorable Brendan O’Brien (ret.) entered judgment for Nissan as well as co-defendant dealership under Illinois’ Contributory fault statute.

On appeal, Plaintiff argued that the trial court improperly removed his post-sale failure-to-warn claim against Nissan from the jury’s consideration. The appellate court disagreed, finding that Nissan’s prior warning against adjusting the steering wheel while driving did not establish knowledge of the specific steering-column defect alleged in the lawsuit. The Appellate Court also concluded that Nissan’s voluntary recalls involving unrelated issues did not create a duty to warn about the alleged defect.

The panel separately rejected Plaintiff’s argument that the jury’s decision was legally inconsistent because it was recorded on the wrong form. The Appellate Court concluded that the jury’s findings clearly reflected its intention to assign 90% of the fault to the Plaintiff and no liability to Nissan, preserving the complete defense verdict in Nissan’s favor.

The unanimous decision delivered a significant appellate result for Nissan and upheld jury verdict in favor of Nissan and the trial court’s handling of both the post-sale failure-to-warn claim and the jury’s allocation of fault.