Drivers or pedestrians injured by a car with defective tires may be able to bring a negligence or products liability lawsuit against the tire manufacturer, retailer, car dealer, and driver. Depending on the case, victims may be able to win compensatory damages for:
- hospital bills and long-term care,
- lost earnings,
- loss of future earnings,
- pain and suffering, and/or
- wrongful death
It also may be possible to win punitive damages as well. But most defective tire lawsuits never go to trial; often the parties can agree to an out-of-court settlement that is favorable for the victim.
In this article, our Las Vegas personal injury attorneys answer frequently-asked-questions about tire defect lawsuits in Nevada, including negligence and product liability claims, standards of proof, and statutes of limitations. Click on a topic to jump to that section:
- 1. What can I do if I got injured by defective tires in Las Vegas, NV?
- 2. What money can I get if I am injured by defective tires in Las Vegas, NV?
- 3. Whom can I sue for my defective tire injuries in Las Vegas, NV?
- 4. How do I prove a defective tire claim in Las Vegas, NV?
- 5. When can I sue after my defective tire injuries in Las Vegas, NV?
- 6. Can I still win a defective tire case if I partly caused the accident in Las Vegas, NV?
- 7. When are tires defective?
1. What can I do if I got injured by defective tires in Las Vegas, Nevada?
There are various claims an accident victim can bring in a defective tire lawsuit. One is “negligence,” where the plaintiff (victim) has the burden to prove the following four elements:
- The defendant(s) owed the plaintiff a duty of care;
- The defendant(s) breached this duty;
- This breach caused the plaintiff’s injury; and
- This injury resulted in damages.1
Another cause of action is “products liability,” where the plaintiff has the burden to prove that the allegedly defective product was designed in a manner that was more dangerous than the consumer expected. Note that the plaintiff does not have to produce proof of a reasonable alternative design that would have been safer.2
1.1. Defective tire injuries
Car accidents, blow-outs, and roll-overs caused by defective tires can cause catastrophic injuries and possibly death. Common injuries include burns, broken bones, head trauma, and spinal injuries. Car accidents can also cause severe post-traumatic stress.
2. What money can I get if I am injured by defective tires in Las Vegas, Nevada?
People injured in an accident caused by defective may be able to recover compensatory damages for:
- Medical bills,
- Pain and suffering,
- Lost wages, and/or
- Loss of future earnings
In some cases, the victim may also be able to recover punitive damages, which can be far larger than compensatory damages.3
3. Whom can I sue for my defective tires injuries in Las Vegas, Nevada?
People injured due to defective tires may be able to sue various parties, including:
- the tire manufacturer, for creating a defective product;
- the tire retailer, if they should have known about the defect;
- The car dealer or lessor, if they should have known about the defect or failed to maintain the tires; and/or
- the driver of the car, if he/she should have known about the defect (commercial drivers have a duty to inspect their tires)
Common manufacturers include Michelin, Firestone, Goodyear, Yokohama, and Cooper.
4. How do I prove a defective tires claim in Las Vegas, Nevada?
In order to prevail in a negligence case in Nevada, the plaintiff has the burden to prove by a “preponderance of the evidence” that the defendant was negligent. This means that it is “more likely than not” that the defendant breached its duty.
In order to prevail in a products liability case in Nevada, the plaintiff has to meet the “consumer-expectation test.” This means the plaintiff has to show that the product “fail[s] to perform in a manner reasonably to be expected in light of its nature and intended function and [is] more dangerous than would be contemplated by the ordinary user having the ordinary knowledge available in the community.”4
Either way, common evidence in tire defect cases include the following:
- Videos or photographs of the accident and damage,
- Eye-witness testimony, and
- Expert testimony by accident reconstruction experts and/or biomechanical engineers,
Learn more about proving negligence in Nevada.
5. When can I sue after my defective tires injuries in Las Vegas, Nevada?
It depends on the specific claims the plaintiff is bringing. Most personal injury claims (such as negligence) have a two (2)-year window to file a lawsuit after the injury occurs. But a products liability case may allow for a four (4)-year window to file a lawsuit.5
6. Can I still win a defective tire case if I partly caused the accident in Las Vegas, Nevada?
Perhaps. Plaintiffs in negligence cases can still recover damages as long as they were not more to blame for the injury than the defendant. So victims who were inexperienced drivers, drove aggressively, or failed to maintain their tires are still advised to see an attorney. It may be possible for partially-to-blame plaintiffs to win a lawsuit if the court determines that the defendant (such as the tire manufacturer) was at least 50% responsible.6
7. When are tires defective?
There are several structural deficiencies that could cause a tire to be defective, such as:
- tread separation, which is when the tread is detached from the tire
- low tread, which is when the grooves are not as deep as it should be for safe driving
- baldness, which is when there is no tread
- poor tire quality, which may cause the tire to lose air quickly
Such defects can cause drivers to lose control and have accidents. And tread that separates from a tire can hit another car or pedestrian, leading to serious injuries.5
Call a Nevada personal injury attorney…
Have you been injured by defective tires in Nevada? Call our Las Vegas personal injury attorneys for a FREE consultation today. We may be able to sue the culprits and win you a large settlement to cover all your expenses. You pay us nothing unless we win your case.
Legal References:
- See, e.g. Scialabba v. Brandise Const. Co., 112 Nev. 965, 921 P.2d 928 (1996).
- Ford Motor Co. v. Trejo, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Sept. 27, 2017).
- NRS 42.005.
- Ford Motor Co. v. Trejo, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Sept. 27, 2017).
- NRS 11.190.
- NRS 41.141.