Williamson, et al. v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc., et al.

Case Updates

The Supreme Court held that federal regulation FMVSS 208 does not preempt state tort suits claiming that manufacturers should have installed lap-and-shoulder belts instead of lap belts.

NCLC urged the Supreme Court to dismiss product liability claims brought against Mazda. The plaintiffs allege that a passenger died because only a lap seatbelt was installed in a minivan's seat. NCLC argued that, under the principles of implied preemption law applied in Geier v. American Honda Motor Co. the claims are preempted because the lap belt complied with standards set by the National Highway Safety Transportation Administration. NCLC warned that unsettling the principles of federal preemption would subject businesses to a patchwork of regulations that could impose an enormous burden on employers already facing a difficult economic climate.