Federal judge Phil Gilbert denied a motion to dismiss a group of Chinese tourists’ lawsuit involving a fatal Utah bus crash, concluding that the plaintiffs sufficiently argued that the Southern District of Illinois has jurisdiction in their amended complaint.
“The plaintiffs have filed an amended complaint that sufficiently pleads subject matter jurisdiction. Ordinarily, an amended complaint renders moot motions to dismiss directed at the original pleading. In this case, however, the motions are not directed to the aspects of the complaint that were amended. Therefore, the court will consider the pending motions as continuing to be active,” Gilbert wrote in his July 13 order.
The amended complaint was filed July 12 against Daimler Trucks North America LLC, Daimler Trucks & Buses US Holding LLC, Daimler AG, Truck Centers Inc., SVO Group Inc, Terrance Minix, and Embassy Specialty Vehicles LLC.
They argue that the Southern District of Illinois has subject matter jurisdiction as the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the plaintiffs are not from the same state as any of the defendants.
They argue that the court has general and specific personal jurisdiction because Daimler allegedly sold the Freightliner M2 106 cutaway chassis and cab to Truck Centers in Troy, Ill. They allege some or all of the transactions or occurrences related to the incident occurred within the district.
“Therefore, all defendants committed some or the tortious acts that are the basis of this action within the Southern District of Illinois; engaged in foreseeable, intentional, and/or systemic contacts within Illinois; purposefully availed themselves of the privileges and benefits of conducting business in the Southern District of Illinois, and sold and placed into the stream of commerce the defective product directly within the Southern District of Illinois,” the complaint states.
The plaintiffs filed their amended complaint in response to the defendants’ motion to dismiss, which was filed May 4 through attorney Scott Stephenson of Litchfield Cavo LLP in Chicago.
The defendants argued that the court lacked general and specific jurisdiction because a truck’s “body” was manufactured and installed on the chassis after it was designed in Oregon and manufactured in Mexico. The truck was then sold and shipped from Texas to Indiana, where it was purchased through Dave Klockow at Truck Centers.
“Although the bill of sale provided by Truck Centers required payments to be remitted to Truck Centers’ Troy, Illinois facility, SVO actually paid Mr. Klockow at the time the truck was delivered to the SVO facility,” the brief stated.
SVO then assembled the bus and sold it to Coachwest Luxury & Professional Motorcars in California.
The plaintiffs rejected the idea that they were forum shopping, arguing that the complaint was filed “no further than 20 miles” from defendant Truck Centers’ headquarters in Troy.
The amended complaint was filed by Hangxio Che, Dengxing Chen, Jianguang Chu, Wan Yun Feng, Guoshen Gao, Xing Gao, Zufang He, Bingdong Jiang, Wanxia Jin, Jiagi Liu, Chenduo Qi, husband of decedent Xiuyum Chen, Wenhao Qi, son of Xiuyum Chen, Shouqi Shen, Youxin Song, Bingmei Xie, Dong Mei Xu, Qian Xu, Qin Xu, Zumian Wang, and Guifang Zhou.
The complaint states that a group of 29 Chinese citizens and one tour leader traveled from China to Los Angeles in September 2019 to participate in a tour of various national parks located in the western part of the country. On Sept. 16, the group began the tour on a 36-passenger Embassy bus designed and manufactured by SVO Group Inc. The bus had a Freightliner Mc 106 chassis designed and manufactured by Daimler Trucks North America. The bus was owned and operated by American Shengji Inc. and was driven by Yu Ren.
On Sept. 20, 2019, they were traveling on the bus at approximately 11:30 a.m. on eastbound Utah State Route 12, a two-laned asphalt paved and striped roadway near Bryce Canyon. The bus was traveling at the posted speed limit of 65 mph when its right-side tires went off the paved roadway while negotiating a slight curve to the right. The driver allegedly attempted to steer the bus back onto the roadway, causing the bus to cross into the westbound travel lane. The driver then steered the bus back, which caused it to enter into a “clockwise yaw. The bus then rolled onto the driver’s side and started sliding on the paved roadway, roof first. When the roof hit the guardrail on the left side of the roadway, the bus rolled another 270 degrees and came to a stop on its wheels.
The crash allegedly caused the roof to deform and create openings, resulting in the ejection of 11 passengers and partial ejection of two others. As a result, four passengers were killed, 15 were seriously injured and 11 suffered minor injuries.
The plaintiffs argue that the jurisdiction is proper because “some or all of the transactions or occurrences related to this action occurred within this district.”
The plaintiffs allege the bus lacked proper stability control systems and had design flaws. They also claim the defendants failed to properly test the vehicle’s crashworthiness, failed to have lane departure warning systems and other safety-related systems in accordance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration guidelines.
Specifically, the defendants allegedly fabricated a one-piece molded roof out of vacuum-formed fiberglass, resulting in a lighter bus body. The plaintiffs allege the defendants failed to adequately research, test, and inspect the ramifications of stripping necessary weight.
“As evidenced by the subject vehicle’s performance in this incident, the strength of its superstructure was insufficient to ensure the residual survival space during the rollover event and to prevent the opening of large portals exposing passengers to the external environment during that event,” the complaint states.
Additionally, the bus had a single luggage storage compartment at the back of the bus behind the rear axles and extending from the floor to the roof of the vehicle. The plaintiffs allege the luggage compartment negatively impacted the stability and handling characteristics of the bus, making it difficult for the driver to control.
“Defendants were aware of the probability of accidents resulting from cutaway bus vehicles drifting off the paved service and/or being exposed to oversteer situations and experiencing excessive yaw in an on-road scenario. Indeed, that is why the Daimler Defendants partnered with Meritor-WABCO more than a decade before the subject Embassy Bus was built, in order to develop and install systems that would prevent these types of accident from happening and to avoid a catastrophic result when they did occur,” the suit states.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois case number 3:21-cv-180