Jury says Chrysler doesn’t need to pay damages in defective headrest trial

Update:

• While Chrysler doesn’t have to pay damages, a jury determined it violated the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act with its faulty automatic headrests, Law360 reports a federal jury decided.
• The seven-member jury spent hours deliberating after a two-week trial in which a class of 70,000 Florida Dodge, Jeep and Chrysler vehicle owners asked for $56 million in damages to replace the faulty automatic head restraints.
• Eleven vehicle models sold and leased between 2010 and 2018 included the faulty headrests, according to Law360.
• Fiat Chrysler extended warranties on the vehicles with headrest issues for up to 10 years but the plaintiffs argued it was not sufficient restitution.

Chrysler headrest class action lawsuit trial overview: 

• Who: Chrysler is arguing that a recall is not necessary during litigation of claims it failed to inform vehicle owners about allegedly defective automatic headrests equipped in 11 of its vehicle models. 
• Why: The automaker claims the headrests do not have a common design defect and that allegations they exploded during vehicle operation are “baseless.” 
• Where: The class action lawsuit is being litigated in Florida federal court. 

(Jan. 23, 2024)

Chrysler told a federal jury in Florida last week that a recall would not be necessary to replace allegedly faulty automatic headrests in several of its vehicle models, as part of litigation of a class action lawsuit filed in 2020. 

Consumers claimed in the headrest class action lawsuit that Chrysler violated Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act by failing to inform them about the allegedly defective automatic headrests they claim are found in 11 of the automaker’s vehicle models. 

Chrysler denies the claims, arguing the automatic headrests in question do not have a common design defect and that allegations the devices exploded while the vehicles were in operation are “baseless,” Law360 reports. 

The automaker argues further that the headrest mechanisms at issue are designed to reduce the risk of whiplash injuries in the event of an accident — in compliance with National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regulations — while taking comfort into account.

Vehicle owners argue automatic headrests held together with plastic pin susceptible to cracking 

Consumers argue the allegedly defective automatic headrests were held together by a cheap plastic pin susceptible to environmental stress cracking that can trigger the devices to prematurely deploy. 

Chrysler argues, however, that its automatic headrests are a “brilliant” technology and that it has conducted hundreds of tests it claims show the automatic headrest parts were durable enough to withstand major temperature swings, according to Law360. 

The vehicle owners are reportedly requesting damages between $800 and $1,100, claiming they overpaid for the more than 70,000 vehicles built with the allegedly faulty automatic headrests.  

In a separate case, a federal jury in Boston sided with Fiat Chrysler in November during a trial over claims the automaker manufactured and sold Dodge, Jeep and Chrysler vehicles with defective headrests that would allegedly deploy without warning. 

The jury in that case determined that, while Fiat Chrysler had been unfair to a class of around 93,000 vehicle owners, it had not actually harmed them. 

Have you been injured by an automatic headrest in a Chrysler vehicle? Do you think Chrysler should recall the vehicles? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiffs are represented by Peter Prieto, Matthew Weinshall, John Gravante III and Dayron Silverio of Podhurst Orseck PA; Benjamin Widlanski, Rachel Sullivan, Robert J. Neary and Gail McQuilkin of Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton LLP; George Franjola of the Law Office of George Franjola; and Michael Burger of Santiago Burger LLP.

The Chrysler headrest class action lawsuit is Nuwer, et al. v. FCA US LLC, Case No. 0:20-cv-60432, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Volvo announces recall for 2024 XC40s due to potential turn signal malfunction
• Hyundai initiates recall for Konas due to battery cable defect
• Ford issues recall for F-150s due to rear axle hub bolt defect
• Recall issued for Toyota, Lexus vehicles due to air bag sensor defect