Featured Denver man sues Specialized for $10 million in helmet product liability case

Discussion in 'General Cycling' started by EricG, Sep 2, 2019.

  1. EricG

    EricG Waiting for snow! Skier

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2018
    Posts:
    760
    Location:
    VT
    Denver man sues Specialized for $10 million in helmet product liability case
    Published August 29, 2019
    DENVER (BRAIN) — A 50-year-old Denver man is suing Specialized Bicycle Components for $10 million, claiming the helmet he wore when he crashed his bike was defective.


    Specialized denies the claims; this week both sides asked the U.S. District Court in Denver to issue a protective order to prevent the public from seeing confidential trade information during the litigation.

    According to his complaint, Victor Moreno said he was wearing a size XXL Specialized Max helmet model when he overcooked a corner while cycling in June 2017. Moreno said he tumbled and slid to the side of the road. His injuries included a skull fracture, scalp laceration and permanent brain injuries.

    Moreno said he bought the helmet at Wheat Ridge Cyclery in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, in 2016.

    "Mr. Moreno bought the helmet because it was one of the few designed to fit his head and because he trusted that it would keep him safe during typical bicycle accident scenarios," he said in the complaint filed in June. He is being represented by Dormer Harpring, LLC, a Denver law firm that specializes in personal injury litigation.

    The complaint asserts that the helmet was sold with the promise that it met various safety standards, including Specialized's "more rigid criteria." Without specifying how, the complaint charges that Moreno's helmet "was not designed and manufactured such that it could comply with the requirements of its certifications and testing."

    The complaint charges that Specialized made manufacturing and testing decision that "resulted in the helmet being cheap instead of reasonably safe during common bicycle accidents."

    Among those decisions was the choice to not use MIPS technology on the model (In November 2018, Specialized announced that MIPS would be available in all its helmet models; the Max model has been discontinued).
    In an August answer to the complaint, Specialized denied Moreno's allegations.

    Specialized also filed a corporate disclosure statement with the court in early August as required by federal rules.

    "Specialized Bicycle Components, Inc. (a nongovernmental corporate party) certifies that it is a privately held corporation, it has no parent corporation, and Merida Industry Co. Ltd., a publicly traded company on the Taiwan Stock Exchange, holds more than 10% or more of its stock," the disclosure reads in part.

    The court has not granted the confidential information protective order that the sides requested earlier this week.
     
  2. Erik Timmerman

    Erik Timmerman Making fresh tracks Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    3,435
    And this is why a couple ounces of styrofoam costs $100.
     
    Rudi Riet, razie, Mendieta and 7 others like this.
  3. Thread Starter
    TS
    EricG

    EricG Waiting for snow! Skier

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2018
    Posts:
    760
    Location:
    VT

    Yep. He even admits to overcooking the corner.. No accountability.
     
  4. Popeye Cahn

    Popeye Cahn Booting up Skier

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2019
    Posts:
    38
    Location:
    Under the Top Gun skies
    It's unfortunate that this person has been seriously injured, but good luck in getting a dime out of Spesh. Interesting that both sides petitioned the court to protect the trade information from public view.
     
  5. coskigirl

    coskigirl Making fresh tracks Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    3,122
    Location:
    Lafayette, CO
    We can assume that Specialized is seeking protection of trade secrets but why would we assume the plaintiff is seeking protection of them? “Confidential information” could mean medical information or something else entirely.
     
    Rudi Riet, Ron, Unpiste and 2 others like this.


  6. Ken_R

    Ken_R Living the Dream Skier

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2016
    Posts:
    3,500
    Location:
    Denver, CO

    ^this :golfclap:
     
  7. cantunamunch

    cantunamunch Meh Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Posts:
    7,752
    I don't know that we're technically assuming anything other than the veracity of the reporting ?
     
  8. pete

    pete not peace but 2 Beers! Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Posts:
    1,025
    Location:
    Iowa
    General thought is he messed up and seeks some money from where ever, sure he'll need it but deep pockets and out of court settlement.

    But unless Specialized certifications claims are false ... simply in his lap.

    The MIPS comment makes no sense.

    Hope he recovers but as noted... why foam is so expensive.
     
  9. coskigirl

    coskigirl Making fresh tracks Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    3,122
    Location:
    Lafayette, CO
    The other poster said “both sides petitioned the court to protect the trade information” which is quite a leap from “the court has not granted the confidential information protective order that the sides requested...” I’d say the assumption lies wholly with the poster, not the reporting.
     
    Tricia likes this.
  10. Blue Streak

    Blue Streak Life is hard. Skiing is easy! Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    2,504
    Location:
    Golden
    I skinned my knee on my Roubaix.
    That ought to be worth a few hundred grand.
    What he said.
     
  11. pchewn

    pchewn Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2017
    Posts:
    635
    Location:
    Beaverton OR
    If the helmets were actually tested by a third party to meet the advertised established industry standards for helmet performance, then I don't see much for the lawsuit to stand on.

    I think it will be easy to find an expert who will testify that the victim would be dead if he hadn't been wearing a helmet.
     
    Rudi Riet, pete, Ken_R and 1 other person like this.
  12. Popeye Cahn

    Popeye Cahn Booting up Skier

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2019
    Posts:
    38
    Location:
    Under the Top Gun skies
    Requested, petitioned... sort of the same, no? IANAL, but the first sentence states it thusly: "...this week both sides asked the U.S. District Court in Denver to issue a protective order to prevent the public from seeing confidential trade information during the litigation" whereas the last sentence was as you have quoted. I simply found that interesting information. I trust you can see why I thought as I did, that both were seeking the same thing because the first sentence stuck in my mind rather than the last. So the reporting should be at question, my summation not so much I feel.
     
  13. coskigirl

    coskigirl Making fresh tracks Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    3,122
    Location:
    Lafayette, CO
    Ah, you’re right, my bad. Too many hours buried in con law today.
     
    Popeye Cahn likes this.
  14. Popeye Cahn

    Popeye Cahn Booting up Skier

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2019
    Posts:
    38
    Location:
    Under the Top Gun skies
    No worries as the kids are wont to say ;-)
     
  15. Primoz

    Primoz Making fresh tracks Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2016
    Posts:
    1,045
    Location:
    Slovenia, Europe
    Probably he's trying not to reveal max speed going through that corner without needing lawyer to sue Specialized and still keeping KOM on Strava :D
     
    razie and Tom K. like this.
  16. Erik Timmerman

    Erik Timmerman Making fresh tracks Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    3,435
    As much as I want to say this guy is a dick for bringing this suit, there's a pretty good chance that it's his insurance company making him do it. When my daughter tore her ACL, I can't tell you how many letters we got from the insurance company asking us where and how it happened, and who could be held responsible.
     
    Slim, Wolfski, Unpiste and 2 others like this.
  17. Coach13

    Coach13 Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2015
    Posts:
    1,136
    Location:
    No. VA
    As we said in another thread it’s common place for the health insurance companies to drive these suits for sure.
     
    Tom K. likes this.
  18. James

    James Skiing the powder Instructor

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2015
    Posts:
    7,960
    This is why the guys who invented SawStop couldn’t sell it to any manufacturers of table saws. It senses when a sawblade touches skin and uses airbag technology to fire a pin and stop the blade saving other fingers. Everyone thought it was brilliant, but if they put it on one model the others would be deemed unsafe and they’d be sued.
    This guy is claiming his helmet is unsafe without MIPS. Afaik, mips doesn’t help with direct impacts that give skull fractures. It’s a twisting issue.
     
  19. cantunamunch

    cantunamunch Meh Skier

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Posts:
    7,752
    Heh, selling patented inventions to established producers has always been unlikely to impossible - they'd far rather pay their own engineers to design around claims and then go fight validity if they have to.
     
    KingGrump and scott43 like this.
  20. Popeye Cahn

    Popeye Cahn Booting up Skier

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2019
    Posts:
    38
    Location:
    Under the Top Gun skies
    And it's cheaper to do this, just ask the guy that invented intermittent wipers, patented them and tried to sell them to Ford. Suing them nearly cost him everything he had, including his family. In the end he only managed to get $10M out of the initial $350M he sought as just compensation ($50 per every vehicle that Ford sold with intermittent wipers).

    https://thehustle.co/windshield-wiper-inventor-robert-kearns
     

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice