05282017Headline:

Detroit, Michigan

HomeMichiganDetroit

Email Steven Gursten Steven Gursten on LinkedIn Steven Gursten on Twitter Steven Gursten on Facebook Steven Gursten on Avvo
Steven Gursten
Steven Gursten
Attorney • 844-227-2878

Holding the manufacturer responsible when the sharp end of a highway guardrail kills drivers

1 comment

Update: Trinity court file is now unsealed, revealing company info on ET-Plus guardrail that’s linked to fatal car accidents and injuries

ET-Plus guardrail by Trinity

ET-Plus guardrail by Trinity

I recently wrote about drivers crashing into the pointy end of a highway guardrail and impaling themselves. These guardrails are the ones that are there to protect us by blocking cars from veering into the other side of the road.

The controversy surrounds Trinity Industries, a Dallas, Texas-based company that supplies safety guardrails in most states throughout the country. Published reports point to a cover-up of safety defects by Trinity, as its guardrails allegedly have led to a disturbing  increase in fatal car accidents involving guardrails impaling cars.

Now in a high-profile case involving the safety of highway guardrails, Harman v. Trinity, the court ordered that all the court records in the case be made open to the public. Here’s a blog post about the case from publicjustice.net.

The court file contains hundreds of sealed pleadings and exhibits relating to its problematic guardrail-end treatment, called the ET-Plus.:

“It has a blunt face that caps the end of a W-beam guardrail… a flat steel plate that is designed to slide along the W-beam upon impact, absorbing energy and guiding the rail away from the vehicle in a flat ribbon. The concern is that the new, narrower design might prevent the end terminal from traveling along the rail, and that it would instead bind up and impale cars,” according to a recent article on Car and Driver.

The court also held that all of the testimony and exhibits from a recent trial of the case must also remain open to the public.

This decision could literally save lives, as it’s a culmination of years of effort by plaintiff’s lawyers to hold Trinity accountable. In October, a jury returned a verdict of $175 million against Trinity for lying to the federal government about secret design modifications the ET Plus.

In the wake of that decision, several states have withdrawn the ET-Plus from their approved products list, and dozens of accident victims and governmental entities have filed lawsuits against Trinity.

Published reports also allege a cover up from the Federal Highway Administration on the Trinity guardrail issue. The Federal Highway Administration is the federal agency charged with ensuring the safety of the nation’s roads. The FHA states the Trinity guardrails meet crash-test criteria. Trinity also denies a problem.

1 Comment

Have an opinion about this post? Please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

  1. spoiledrottenbrat says:
    up arrow

    Where are your brains everyone? The plaintiff in the legal suit (Josh Harman) against Trinity illegally built and installed 280 ET Plus on American highways until he was forced to take them all down (by a court). Josh Harman apparently loved and approved of the ET Plus and its functionality 100%, or else why would he invade Trinity’s patent for the ET Plus?
    The plaintiff has pulled the wool over your eyes and done a flip flop on his knowledge and former “love” of the ET Plus FOR MONEY he hopes to win in a judgment. The FHWA and the TTI see it this way as well – and sided with Trinity right down the line – rebuking Harman’s allegations. Sorry for anyone that doesn’t see the truth for what it is.

    Love the ET Plus one day. Call it a dangerous devise the next. How ignorant folks can be to fall for such a hoax (in the court room!).