During the development of the Bronco II, it became clear that Ford would not meet the company’s stated safety and engineering design goals. The car was too high and too narrow to "reduce rollover propensity" or "respond safely to large steering inputs which are typical of accident avoidance or emergency maneuvers." The Jeep CJ-7 was the Bronco II’s image vehicle, and Ford tried to duplicate the CJ-7’s performance and characteristics despite the Jeep CJ-5 and CJ-7 having rollover propensities significantly higher than other vehicles in their class. The Jeep and subsequently the Bronco II had very low Stability Index ratings (a factor of height and width of wheelbase).

As early as February 1981, Ford engineers identified the Bronco II’s poor stability index as a key problem with the vehicle. For an additional cost of $83 per vehicle, Ford could have made a substantially safer car. These changes were rejected by Ford management because they would have delayed production and sale of the vehicle. Ford did not widen the SUV three to four inches until 2002, almost 20 years after the engineers’ warnings. Before a single vehicle rolled off the assembly line, Ford executives at the highest level knew that the Bronco II was unsafe, and would roll over, injure and potentially kill a significant number of the people who bought it.

Due to the nature of the construction trade, individuals employed on construction sites find themselves confronted with dangerous, life-threatening work conditions on a daily basis. Serious accidents and injuries resulting in personal injury and wrongful death occur with alarming frequency at construction sites throughout the country. With robust economic conditions fueling a construction boom, the frequency and severity of construction site accidents is bound to increase in the future.

However, many states workers' compensation laws may severely limit recovery for a construction site accident. State laws that preclude an employee from suing an employer also generally limit the employee to a workers' compensation system which may not provide compensation for pain and suffering. Many of these compensation laws may place specific limits on how long an injured worker may collect benefits, even if the worker is injured indefinitely. Often, in order to receive compensation that accounts for pain and suffering, a party other than the employer must be found to bear some responsibility for the injury-causing accident.

Knowledge of federal state regulations governing construction sites is imperative when developing theories against general contractors and subcontractors that may allow for legal action when it appears that such laws would prevent recovery. Further, your legal representative should have experience in the inspection of worksites, identification of critical witnesses and preservation of importance evidence.