Propeller Guard Information Center

Archive for McGarrigle

Jan
12
2012

Propeller Accidents Similar to the McGarrigle Accident: Mercury Said There Were None – Our Findings Indicate Otherwise

by Gary

Mercury Marine Tiller Outboards

Mercury Marine Tiller Outboards

In McGarrigle v. Mercury Marine Mercury claims McGarrigle’s accident is the first one of its kind involving one of the over 750,000 tiller outboards (portable outboards) they built from 1986 to July 2007. We suspect there were several more. This post documents our quick search for others.

Our Mercury Marine Tells Court the McGarrigil Accident is the First One Involving Mercury Tiller Steered Outboards post defines exactly what Mercury Marine said. Read More→

0 Categories : Legal Shorts
Dec
27
2011

Mercury Marine Tells Court the McGarrigil Accident is the First One Involving Mercury Tiller Steered Outboards

by Gary

In McGarrigle v. Mercury Marine, a propeller / kill switch case, Mercury Marine claims John McGarrigle is the the first person NOT using a kill switch to be injured by a Mercury Marine tiller steered outboard.

We find that hard to believe, but before we can prove them wrong, we need to determine exactly what Mercury Marine’s legal team said.

On page 8 of the 20 December 2011 Partial Summary Judgement Opinion by the Court, (document 41 in the U.S. District Court New Jersey case docket), the court restates Mercury’s position:

Defendant argues that Dr. Fisher should not be permitted to testify that the design of the outboard engine was and is defective because it does not incorporate a lanyard A type stop switch. Defendant states that between 1986 and July 2007, it sold more than 750,000 8 to 25 horsepower outboard engines that use the lanyard B. It also states that, other than plaintiff’s accident, it is aware of no other accidents of a scenario similar to plaintiff’s, which resulted in propeller strike injuries to an ejected operator of a small hand-tilled outboard engine who did not use the lanyard B.

Read More→

0 Categories : Legal Shorts
Dec
21
2011

Kenneth W. Fisher Will be Allowed to Testify for Plaintiffs in McGarrigle v. Mercury Marine

by Gary

For basic information on John McGarrigle and Barbara McGarrigle v. Mercury Marine in U.S. District Court, D. New Jersey, see our McGarrigle v. Mercury Marine case page.

Very briefly, John McGarrigle fell from a small boat when it hit a wave, was not wearing a lanyard kill switch, the boat circled repeatedly, he tried to re-board it, and was struck by the propeller.

Both sides moved for summary judgement on some issues prior to the trial. Both sides won some issues and lost some issues. The full opinion written by Disrict Judge Noel L. Hillman is available on Leagle.com.

The defense tried to block Kenneth W. Fisher from being an expert witness for the plaintiff. They said he was not an expert in this field (kill switches on small boats) under Daubert. They also do not want to allow Dr. Fisher or others to use U.S. Coast Guard Navigational and Vessel Inspection Circular No. 4-89 (Circular 4-89). Defense claims Circular 4-89 only applies to commercial vessels. Defense also wants to prevent Dr. Fisher or others from using American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) F 1166-07 standard regarding human factors engineering (they grant it refers to ships and marine structures, but claim it does not specifically mention recreational boats).

In a 20 December 2011 opinion, the court said Dr. Fisher will be allowed to testify and he can use ASTM F 1166-07, but he will not be allowed to use Circular 4-89.

At the same time, Plaintiffs moved for summary judgement to prevent Defense from being able to claim the accident was caused by the victim taking a small boat out in choppy water and going too fast, they also wanted to block evidence of his behavior after being ejected (tired to re-board the circling boat), and wanted to block evidence that neither Mr Garrigle or his father read the outboard owners manual.

In the same 20 December 2011 opinion, the court said the defense would be allowed to present evidence of a proximate cause of the accident being the condition of the water and the speed of the boat. Defense will also be allowed to discuss the victim’s attempts to re-board the circling boat. The defense will not be able to introduce the failure of Mr. Garrigle or his father to read the owners manual as evidence of comparative fault or as a proximate cause because the defendant acknowledges some people operate their outboards without reading the manual, and thus it was foreseeable. Read More→

0 Categories : Legal Shorts
Dec
21
2011

McGarrigle v. Mercury Marine propeller case / lanyard kill switch case

by Gary

John McGarrigle and Barbara McGarrigle v. Mercury Marine. Civil Action No. 09-4625. United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

The Propeller Accident

Saturday, July 21, 2007, 37 year old John McGarrigle, of Pennsylvania, was operating a 12 foot aluminum fishing boat on Delaware Bay near Seabreeze, New Jersey about 5:20pm by himself. The small tiller steered boat, belonging to his father, was powered by a 2001 15 horsepower Mercury Marine outboard motor. The water was choppy, John was not wearing a lanyard kill switch. He was pitched overboard, the boat went into the “Circle of Death”, he tried to grab and re-board the spinning boat, and was struck by the propeller. John received severe injuries to his head and neck. A bystander on shore, swam out 100 to 150 feet and kept him afloat till more help could arrive. The prop strike victim was brought to shore in another boat and life flighted to an area hospital. The Coast Guard was able to stop the still circling boat by using a rope to foul its propeller. (Accident description was assembled from court records and several newspaper accounts.)

A New Jersey Patrol Officer interviewed the victim about a month later. The victim reported he had been going about 15 miles per hour, hit a wave, and was ejected. The same officer had responded to the accident. The patrol officer logged the accident as being caused by “excessive speed”, but testified he had no actual knowledge of the victim’s speed. Read More→

0 Categories : Legal Shorts

Featured Content

Aspects of the Propeller Safety Debate chart

Houseboat Propeller Regulation Proposed and Withdrawn by USCG: Analysis by PGIC