Kolbeck v. General Motors Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• although an “extremely close issue,” court held that Safety Act and Standard 208 pre-empted common law damage claim for failure to provide a passive occupant restraint system
• “The courts which find express preemption of passive restraint claims ... construe the savings clause to apply only to matters not covered by the FMVSS, or in cases of negligent compliance with FMVSS. I am unable to find a basis to support such a narrow reading of the effect of section 1397(c

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).