Epidemiol Rev 2003;25:90-98
Copyright © 2003 by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
PREVENTION |
Role of Litigation in Preventing Product-related Injuries
From the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.
Received for publication July 1, 2002; accepted for publication February 13, 2003.
Abbreviations: FMVSS, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard; NHTSA, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; TFI, thick film ignition.
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
 |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
Injuries and the law are connected in many important ways. The law can be a powerful tool for reducing the risk of injury (1). Laws can compel certain individual behaviors, such as seatbelt use, and prohibit other behaviors, such as speeding, to protect the safety of us all. Laws can also require product manufacturers to design and market their products in a manner that will reduce the likelihood of injury.
Product safety rules are enacted at all levels of government—federal, state, and local. Sometimes these laws, called statutes, are enacted directly by a legislature. Often, however, the details of safe design are delegated to administrative agencies, such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) or the Consumer Product Safety Commission, for promulgation and enforcement. These administrative rulings are referred to as "regulations." There is a substantial body of literature that evaluates the effectiveness of a variety of
|
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE |
|---|
|
RECENT CASE EXAMPLES |
|---|
Case example 1: Bridgestone/Firestone tires and the Ford Explorer
Background. NHTSA’s initial role. Litigation and media attention. Conflicting data. Industry and legislative change. Case example 2: Ford and vehicle stalling
|
EPIDEMIOLOGY IN LITIGATION |
|---|
|
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW AFFECTING THE USE OF LITIGATION |
|---|
Admissibility of scientific evidence
Products that comply with safety standards: preemption
Firearms: conflicting state law and "obvious hazards"
|
CONCLUSION |
|---|
Correspondence to Jon S. Vernick, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 North Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21205 (e-mail: JVernick@jhsph.edu).
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. S. Vernick, L. Rutkow, and D. A. Salmon Availability of Litigation as a Public Health Tool for Firearm Injury Prevention: Comparison of Guns, Vaccines, and Motor Vehicles Am J Public Health, November 1, 2007; 97(11): 1991 - 1997. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. S. Vernick, L. Rutkow, and S. P. Teret Public Health Benefits of Recent Litigation Against the Tobacco Industry JAMA, July 4, 2007; 298(1): 86 - 89. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. Pless Road traffic injury prevention BMJ, April 10, 2004; 328(7444): 846 - 846. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. S. Vernick and S. P. Teret MAKING VEHICLES SAFER Am J Public Health, February 1, 2004; 94(2): 170 - 170. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. B. Thacker and E. J. MacKenzie Preface: The Role of the Epidemiologist in Injury Prevention and Control--An Unmet Challenge Epidemiol. Rev., August 1, 2003; 25(1): 1 - 2. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. W. Runyan Introduction: Back to the Future--Revisiting Haddon's Conceptualization of Injury Epidemiology and Prevention Epidemiol. Rev., August 1, 2003; 25(1): 60 - 64. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|